sanctity and mysticism

8/19/2019 Sanctity and Mysticism

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sanctity-and-mysticism 1/261



Sanctity and Mysticism in Medieval Egypt



SUNY series in Islam

Seyyed Hossein Nasr, editor



Sanctity and Mysticismin

Medieval Egypt

The Waf å< Sufi Order

and

The Legacy of Ibn >Arab•

Richard J. A. McGregor

State University of New York Press



Published by

State University of New York Press, Albany

© 2004 State University of New York

All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoeverwithout written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrievalsystem or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic,

electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or other-wise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.

For information, address State University of New York Press,90 State Street, Suite 700, Albany, NY 12207

Production by Marilyn P. SemeradMarketing by Jennifer Giovani

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

McGregor, Richard J. A.Sanctity and mysticism in medieval Egypt : the Waf å< Sufi order and the

legacy of Ibn >Arab• / Richard J. A. McGregor.p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 0-7914-6011-8 (alk. paper)1. Sufism—Egypt—History. 2. Waf å, Mu˙ammad, 1302 or 3-1363. 3. Ibn

al->Arab•, 1165–1240. 4. Muslim saints—Egypt—History. I. Title.

BP188.8.E3M34 2004297.4'0962—dc22

2003059027

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1



To Antoinette, Ginny, Liz, and baby Liz



This page intentionally left blank.



Contents

List of Illustrations ix

Acknowledgments xi

Note on Transliteration xiiiIntroduction 1

1. Tirmidh•, Ibn >Arab•, and Others on Sanctity 9

Tirmidh• on Walå ya

Sahl Tustar• on Walå ya

Lesser Treatments of Walå ya

Walå ya and Sh•>ism

Ibn >Arab• and Walå ya

2. The Early Shådhiliyya and Sanctity 27

Literature and History of the Shådhiliyya

Al-Shådhil•, Tirmidh•, and Ibn >Arab•

The Early Figures of the Order

The Writings of Ibn Båkhilå

Proximity to the Divine

The Levels of Walå ya

Sanctity and Prophecy

3. The Waf å’iyya in Time and Space 49

Arriving from the Maghreb

Among the Elite of Cairo

4. The Writings of the Waf å’s 71

Poetry

Supplications (du>å )



Jurisprudence ( fiqh) and Exegesis (tafs• r )

Mystical Treatises (Mu˙ammad Waf å’)

Mystical Treatises (>Al• Waf å’)5. Sanctity and Mu˙ammad Waf å’ 89

Absolute Being and Its Self-disclosure

The Preexistential and the Everlasting

Spiritual Anthropology

Cosmology

The Teaching Shaykh and Beyond

The Mu˙ammadan Reality and the Pole

Sanctity, the Renewer, and the Seal

6. Sanctity according to >Al• Waf å’ 119

Divine Oneness, Self-disclosure, and Creation

The Teacher and Oneness

On Walå ya and Nubuwwa

The Seal of Sainthood

The Seal and the Renewer of Religion

Conclusion 157

Notes 163

Bibliography 219

Indexes 239

viii Contents



Figure 1. Cairo cemetery (City of the Dead) 63

Figure 2. Entrance to Waf å’ Mosque 64

Figure 3. Tombs in Waf å’ Mosque 65

Figure 4. Grave marker, >Al• Waf å’ 66

Figure 5. The Waf å’ house 67

Figure 6. Remains of fountain in Waf å’ house 68

Map The Waf å’s in Cairo (del. N. Lacoste) 69

Table 1.0 The Early Waf å’ iyya 70

Illustrations



Acknowledgments

The research for this book has received financial support from the following

institutions: the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada;

the J. W. McConnell Foundation (Canada); and the Ministère de l’éducationnationale, de la recherche et de la technologie (France).

My thanks are extended to the various institutions that made their manuscript

archives available to me. They are the following: al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya

(Cairo); Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya (Cairo); Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preus-

sischer Kulturbesitz (Germany); Uppsala Universitetsbibliotek (Sweden);

Bibliothèque Nationale (France); Library of the India Office (England); Leiden

University (the Netherlands). In Canada my research has benfitted from numer-

ous services provided by the Islamic Studies Library at McGill University. TheInstitut Français d’Archéologie Orientale (Cairo) has supported my work in a

number of ways over the last few years in the true spirit of academic enterprise.

I would also like to acknowledge my debt to Dr. Hermann Landolt. I hope I

have inherited something from the intellectual tradition he represents.

Earlier sections of this research have appeared as “Being and Knowing

According to a 14th century Cairene Mystic” Annales Islamologiques 32 (2002);

“New Sources for the Study of Sufism in Mamluk Egypt” Bulletin of the School

of Oriental and African Studies 65,2 (2002); and “The Concept of Sainthood

According to Ibn Båkhila; a Shådhil• Shaykh of the 8th/14th century” in Le

saint et son milieu ou comment lire les sources hagiographiques? R. Chih and

D. Gril eds. (Cairo: I.F.A.O., 2000).



Note on Transliteration

I have not italicized or transliterated Arabic words found in the Oxford English

Dictionary. Arabic words considered technical terms, and perhaps familiar to

the non-Arabic reader, have been transliterated rather than written in Arabicscript. The Arabic passages I have given in the notes reflect the script simplifi-

cations present in the manuscript sources. Because I have tried to avoid editing

this material, many hamazå t and dots over a t å ’marb¥† a, for example, have not

been provided. The transliteration system adopted is that used by the Inter-

national Journal of Middle East Studies. Dates are given first according to the

Muslim lunar calendar, followed by their Common Era equivalent.



Today, any visitor to Cairo will certainly notice the huge mosque of Mu˙am-

mad >Al•, perched above the ramparts of the Citadel on the eastern edge of the

city. Not of great historical interest, the visitor might not spend much time atthis nineteenth-century mosque before moving farther into the Citadel complex

to take in the monuments there—massive defensive walls, towers, mosques, and

a palace. Fortifications were started here under Íalå˙ al-D•n in the sixth/twelfth

century, with various rulers and dynasties adding to the complex over the next

seven hundred years. Running behind the Citadel are the steep Muqa††am hills,

which mark the eastern limit of premodern Cairo. To the north and the south of

the Citadel, along the base of the Muqa††am range are the vast cemeteries known

as “al-Qaråfa.” A modern walking guide describes these parts of the city:

Each cemetery is a true necropolis, a city of the dead, once organically

joined but today severed by the modern highway of Salah Salim; but

they are also areas of very lively expressions of life. Surrounding the

tombs of sultans and amirs are thousands of family burial plots. Mostly

these are courtyards, open and closed, containing cenotaphs and burial

rooms. On Thursday evenings and Fridays, and on major feast days,

members of the family, particularly women, come to the cemeteries

to visit the dead. This has always been considered a pleasurableexcursion. Today one can still see peasant carts rumbling through the

town, loaded with women in black milayas, with blankets, cooking

utensils and comestibles, headed for the cemetery. Others will aready

be there, seated in groups, picnicking among the grave markers.1

Introduction



Deep into the Southern Cemetery, east of the mausoleum of Imåm Shåfi>• (d.

205/820), with a bit of searching, one finds the shrine-mosque of the Waf å’

family. As Cairene monuments go, it is not a remarkable complex. A humbleminaret stands on the west side of the entrance to the mosque. Yet upon enter-

ing, one is struck by the fact that it contains a good number of graves. It is clear

that this eighteenth-century mosque has been built over what was originally a

family burial plot. In the center are the graves of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ (d.

765/1363) and his son >Al• (d. 807/1405), under marble cenotaphs decorated as

a typical medieval Egyptian shrine. These men were revered as saints in their

own lifetimes, founded their own sufi order, and contributed to the heritage of

Islamic mystical philosophy. In order to explore their contribution, we must

travel across the city to the library of al-Azhar University. Here we find manu-

script copies of their writings—some existing nowhere else. These writings will

be the subject of our study.

The present work, as I hope the title has made clear, is not a survey of the

concept of ‘sanctity’ throughout all of medieval Islamic thought. Beyond noting

the essentials of the idea in an introductory fashion, I will restrict our investi-

gation to the writings of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’, to their direct intellectual

influences and their immediate milieu. Briefly, our concern in this book will be

to answer as best we can the following questions: How did these mystical thinkersunderstand sanctity? Upon what ideas from the Islamic tradition did they rely?

and What contribution did they in turn make to this tradition? In the course of

our exploration, however, the scope at times will appear much wider, taking in

related issues from philosophy, theology, and social history.

Before exploring the idea of sainthood itself we must first set out the his-

torical parameters and landmarks of the Islamic mystical tradition, particularly

the elements that will be relevant to our study. We begin by noting that the foun-

dational document of the Islamic religion, the Qur’an, provides little explicittreatment of mystical themes. In the later chapters of this study we shall discuss

the story of Moses and al-Kha∂ir, which is probably the closest the Qur’an

comes to treating the concept of ‘sainthood’. Another significant passage, but

in this instance largely symbolic, is the Parable of the Niche of Light (24:35):

Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The parable of His

Light is as if there were a Niche, and within it a Lamp; the Lamp is

enclosed in Glass; the glass as it were a brilliant star: Lit from a

blessed Tree, an Olive, neither of the East nor the West, whose Oil iswell-nigh Luminous. Though fire scarce touched it: Light upon Light!

Allah doth set forth Parables for men: and Allah doth know all things.2

The symbol of light will later be picked up by various mystical thinkers, the

most prominent being the theologian al-Ghazål• (d. 505/1111) and the philoso-

2 Introduction



pher al-Suhraward• al-Maqt¥l (d. 587/1191).3 Parables notwithstanding, it

would be difficult to find in the Qur’anic text anything approaching a sustained

mystical doctrine.4

Islamic mysticism would instead be forced to seize uponvarious passages and through creative interpretations use them as vehicles for

futher speculation. Specific examples of mystical scriptural exegesis (tafs• r ) are

too many to mention, but one Qur’anic passage—alluding to a night journey by

the Prophet—came to play an important role in most later schools of mystical

thought. This is the story of the Mi>rå j, an ascent through the seven heavens

leading ultimately to contact with God. The scriptural basis for this story is the

following:

Glory to [Allah] Who did take His Servant for a Journey by night from

the Sacred Mosque, whose precincts We did bless—in order that We

might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth

and seeth [all things]. (17:1)

For indeed he [Mu˙ammad] saw him [Gabriel] at a second descent,

near the Lote-tree, beyond which none may pass: Near it is the Garden

of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (In mystery unspeak-

able!). [His] sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did hesee, of the signs of his Lord, the Greatest! (53:13–18)

From this scant account, the hadith literature developed an elaborate tale of

Mu˙ammad being transported from Mecca to Jerusalem, by a mythical beast,

and from there led upward through the seven heavens, meeting various prophets

along the way. The account usually concludes with Mu˙ammad’s negotiations

with God concerning the number of daily prayers encumbant upon his new reli-

gious community.5

The theme of Mi>rå j was later taken up by the mystics al-Bas†åm• (d. 261/875) and Ibn >Arab• (d. 638/1240), who recorded their own

Heavenly ascensions.6 Later, we shall also see that these heavens and prophets

reappear in the writings of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’, though interpreted in a

novel way.

The earliest doctrinal developments of the Islamic community—despite

the accounts of the hadith literature—are largely beyond historical reconstruc-

tion. This is true also for the mystical tradition, the reconstruction of which

is only possible from about one hundred years after the Prophet’s death. Here,

in the shadow of the great pious ascetic and theologian Óasan al-Baßr• (d.110/728), and the early Sh•>• imåms, particularly Ja>far al-Íådiq (d. 145/765),

various spiritual movements developed. A tradition of ethical self-reflection,

with the aim of controlling vanity and pride, developed with the Iraqi moral-

ist al-Mu˙åsib• (d. 243/857).7 Other essential early thinkers were Ab• Yaz•d

al-Bas†åm•, who seems to have been the first to develop the concept of ‘ fanå ’’

Introduction 3



(the mystic soul passing away into God) and the tradition of sha† a˙å t (ecstatic

utterances),8 and Ab¥ al-Qåsim al-Junayd (d. 297/909), the representative of a

more sober approach to mystical experience and language.9

A particularlyimportant contribution was made by Sahl al-Tustar• (d. 283/896), who among

other things advanced the idea of the Light of the prophet Mu˙ammad as a uni-

versal spiritual reality.10 This idea had also been touched upon earlier by Ja>far

al-Íådiq.11

Although the essential theological tenets of Islamic belief remained

unchallenged, there does appear to have been a distinct shift within the mysti-

cal tradition from about the turn of the third/nineth century. A survey of the

extant literature of the earlier “classical” era shows a distinct lack of interest in

what we would call either “philosophical” or “metaphysical” issues. In con-

trast, by the seventh/thirteenth century the medieval movement—known then

universally as “sufism”—had fully embraced metaphysics.12 Significant also

was a shift in the understanding of the transmission of mystical knowledge. The

fifth/eleventh century roughly divides the period of the “training shaykh” from

that of the “teaching shaykh.”13 Distinction between these two pedagogical

models, while never airtight, is based on the former as a simple transmitter of

sufi wisdom, with the latter explicitly functioning as a spiritual guide to the

adepts under his direction. This shift signaled a new theoretical dimmensionthat was to parallel the transformative spiritual exercises meted out to adepts.14

The term sufi itself, designating a Muslim mystic, appeared in the late sec-

ond/eighth century in K¥fa, Iraq; but beyond followers who gathered around

certain prominent teachers, it is difficult to identify any distinct organizational

basis for sufism. The properly sufi institutions known variously as “tekkes,”

“ribå† s,” “khå nqå hs” and “ zå wiyas,” appeared from the turn of the fourth/tenth

century throughout most regions of the Islamic world.

An early controversy that was to define the future direction of mainstreamsufism took place in the regions of Khuråsån (Central Asia) and Iraq. The issue

at hand was how to treat the nafs (lower soul). Early ascetic practices had con-

cerned themselves with renunciation, aiming to control the appetites of the

lower self, which were understood to hamper one’s approach to the divine.15

One form this self-discipline took was the school of Mu˙ammad ibn Karråm

(d. 255/869), called the “Karråmiyya.” Typically, this was an overt asceticism,

which saw renunciation almost as a social ethic.16 Distinct from this was the

position on the nafs (lower soul) taken by the Malåmatiyya, a group that held

that public diplay of renunciation was itself a pandering to the lower soul’sappetite for recognition.17 Instead, the Malåmatiyya sought to control the nafs

while out of the public eye, or even by evoking censure. This movement did

meet with some success and would reappear in various forms in later centuries.18

In turn, the ascetics and the Malåmatiyya were opposed by Ab¥ al-Óak •m al-

Tirmidh• (d. between 295/905 and 300/910). His approach was one that sought

4 Introduction



to transcend the lower soul by developing the mystical perspicacity of the

believing heart. This “seeing” heart transforms the negative, selfish character of

the nafs into a positive one, which thus encourages the seeking and fearing of God. This strategy aimed at abandoning the nafs, rather than obsessing over its

control and humiliation.19

We cannot here do justice to all the developments within the mystical tra-

dition, but one set of philosophical concepts must be mentioned. This is the

Neoplatonic tradition, which came to be incorporated into the mainstream mys-

tical tradition in the centuries following the death of Ibn S•nå, its greatest expo-

nent.20 Although Neoplatonism had always been an essential element of the the-

ology of the Ismå>•l• Sh•>•s, it had not become central for the early mystics. It

was not until the early medieval period that sufism began to express itself using

a Neoplatonic vocabulary. This system, first elaborated by the Greco-Egyptian

Plotinus (d. 210 a.d.), was rather different from what was to become the Qur’anic

worldview in that it described God as a distant Necessary Being, which in con-

templating Itself, gives rise to the First Intellect. This emanation continues in

stages, producing the heavenly spheres and ultimately the Active Intellect (al-

> aql al-fa>>å l), which provides the forms for all the material world. From the

perspective of the individual here below, the highest goal is to develop one’s

imaginative faculty to the point where it can reach the Active Intellect directly,thus gaining access to its complete store of intelligible forms. This is how, for

example, prophecy and miracles are possible.21 We shall see later in our study

of sainthood that Neoplatonic structures are behind much of what is proposed.

Brief mention must be made here of the most important institutional devel-

opment in the sufi tradition, that of the † ar • qa (order or brotherhood).22 From the

midsixth/twelfth century orders developed, each being based on the teachings

and spiritual authority of an eponymous saintly founder. They were distinct

organizations, each with its own devotional rituals (e.g., dhikr , du> a), spiritualdisciplines (e.g., khalwa, mur å qaba), spiritual lineage (isnå d ), location ( zå wiya,

khå nqå h, ribå† , tekke), and mystical literature (poetic, hagiographical, and doc-

trinal). The exclusive nature of these orders made them different from the earli-

er forms of association among sufis. A great number have appeared throughout

the Islamic world, the most succcessful being derived from >Abd al-Qådir al-

J•lån• (d. 561/1166) (al-Qådiriyya), >Abd al-Qåhir al-Suhraward• (d. 563/1167)

(al-Suhrawardiyya), A˙mad al-Rif å>• (d. 571/1175) (al-Rif å>iyya), Ab¥ al-

Óasan al-Shådhil• (d. 658/1258) (al-Shådhiliyya), and Jalål al-D•n R¥m• (d.

672/1273) (al-Mawlawiyya). Most orders appearing after the eigth/fourteenth

century are branches of one of these original five.

As for the concept of ‘sanctity’ itself, we may say generally that its vocab-

ulary has a scriptural basis. We find the word walå ya used in the Qur’an twice.

Of a wealthy man, a nonbeliever, who has lost his riches, we read, “The only

protection comes from Allah (al-walå ya li-Llå h), the True One” (18:44). In S ¥rat

Introduction 5



al-Anf å l (8:72) we read, “As to those who believed but came not into exile; You

owe no duty of protection (walå ya) to them until they come into exile.” In the

first example, walå ya is divine authority, while in the second it represents theties of allegiance between believers. As for the term wal• (one who gives or

receives walå ya), it is mentioned more than one hundred times in the Qur’an,

meaning “patron,” “protector” (divine or otherwise), “friend,” and “ally.” The

terms awliyå ’Allå h (10:62), the “friends or saints of God,” and their opposite,

the awliyå ’ al-Shay†å n (4:76), also appear.23

Of course these terms cannot be said to have carried the identical meaning

at the time of the Prophet as they would in the medieval or even classical peri-

ods. As will be seen below, the concept of sanctity has its own history of devel-

opment. Nevertheless, the semantic shifts in the history of religious thought

should not be seen as complete breaks. Michel Chodkiewicz points out that one

must not make a too rigid distinction between Qur’anic sanctity and that of the

classical period. He suggests that in addition to the terms wal• and walå ya the

Qur’an (56:10–11, 88-–89) also uses terms such as aß˙å b al-yam• n (compan-

ions of God’s right side) and muqarrab¥n (those close to God) in order to

communicate the full range of the concept of sanctity.24

It was with the great figures of classical mystical thought, such as Óasan

al-Baßr•, Óak •m al-Tirmidh•, al-Bas†åm•, and Sahl al-Tustar• that the funda-mental notions of sancitity were fleshed out. These developments and elabora-

tions continued throughout the Middle Ages, where they were taken up rather

dramatically by Ibn >Arab• (d. 638/1240). In the Sh•>• world, the doctrine of the

Imåms can be seen as embodying the essentials of walå ya as it existed in Sunni

circles, or one might understand it at least as serving much the same function.

Regardless of how one positions the idea of walå ya in Sh•>ism, it is remarkable

how great an impact the writings of Ibn >Arab• made in those circles. It seems

that in Ibn >Arab•’s doctrine of walå ya both the Sh•>• and Sunn• esoteric tradi-tions were able to find a conception that spoke to them.25 We shall present a

substantial discussion of Ibn >Arab• in our first chapter.

In the study that follows, the early development of sufism will not be

addressed; neither will our focus be the origins of the mystical tradition. It is

hoped, however, that a contribution will be made to the history of the religious

thought of the Middle Ages.26 In short, this research explores the development

of the concept of ‘sainthood’, after Ibn >Arab• (al-Shaykh al-Akbar), and specif-ically in Egypt. While much has been written on Ibn >Arab•, little scholarly

effort has been put into exploring those who came after him. The Waf å’iyya are

important in this post–Ibn >Arab• world. They were not commentators on the

shaykh’s works, nor were they popularizers of his thought, instead they took in

his teachings, digested them, and turned to work out their own observations and

6 Introduction



understandings of the mystical universe. To do this, they employed the lan-

guage and doctrines taught them by Ibn >Arab•. The Akbarian corpus was not a

passive object of study for Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’, rather, having taken itto heart, they used it as a vehicle for their own mystical speculations on saint-

hood and other topics including the nature of existence itself.

The first chapter of this study will survey the various doctrines of walå ya as

developed by al-Tirmidh• and Ibn >Arab•. From this we isolate a number of mod-

els, which are used for comparative purposes throughout the rest of the study.

Although we also touch briefly on a number of other figures, many avenues of

research on this subject remain open. The second chapter turns to the other tradi-

tion in which the Waf å’iyya had roots, that of the early Shådhiliyya sufi order.

Here we introduce the central figures and attempt to outline a general theory of

sanctity. In this section we introduce the unexplored writings of Mu˙ammad

Waf å’s teacher Ibn Båkhilå. The third chapter is a historical exploration of the

practices and development of this unusual sufi order and the vicissitudes of the

Waf å’ family in Cairo. The following chapter takes up the writings of Mu˙am-

mad and >Al• Waf å’. Since more than twenty-eight titles are attributed to them—

with almost all remaining in manuscript form—I have tried to present a basic

account of the contents of each. The most important categories of these writings

are poetry and mystical treatises. It should be noted that beyond our study of sanctity, these new sources offer an abundance of material for further study.

The fifth chapter turns to Mu˙ammad Waf å’s theory of sainthood. In the course

of this analysis a number of related topics are addressed, such as the nature of

God and existence, the levels of creation, and the spiritual abilities of humanity.

In the last chapter we find many of the same themes we encountered with

Mu˙ammad in the fifth chapter. Here >Al• Waf å’ follows his father in approach

and concern, but clearly he has original contributions to make in a number of

places. His expansion on the theory of the Seal of Saints, and his dramatic ver-sion of the centenarian “Renewer of Religion” make for exciting reading.

This book is thus concerned with the Waf å’s and their mystical philoso-

phy—particularly their theory of sanctity. Understanding the significance of

Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ would be impossible without stopping to consider

what for them was a central issue. By following them in their intellectual con-

cerns we are not only given a better sense of their worldview, but we are also

allowed to dig deepest, as it were, where the ground is most fertile. Although

research into other elements of Waf å’ thought and practice would certainly

yield interesting results, by taking up walå ya as the central theme of our study

it seems fair to claim that we are following the strengths of the authors. From

an individual perspective, we shall see that for both Mu˙ammad and >Al• the

nature of sainthood had implications for their own identitiy. The father defined

himself, at critical moments in both his writings and his public life, through his

discourse on sanctity. The son’s presentation of his father relied substantially on

Introduction 7



this same discourse. Yet not only did >Al• argue for his father’s sanctity, but his

own self-identification became wrapped up in the same issues. We shall see

how >Al

•struggles to find a place for himself behind his father in the pantheon

of saints. Beyond this concern with self-identification, an argument for rele-

vance can also be made with regard to this book being focussed on walå ya. In

the chapters below it will become clear that the theory of sanctity serves well

as a ground for comparison with other thinkers. Much of the relevance of the

Waf å’s is to be found in their treatment of what at their time was a central issue

in Islamic mystical thought. In order to situate them within their intellectual

sufi milieu, we must find points for comparison, and the theory of sanctity

serves us well here. Finally, approaching the universe of the Waf å’s principally

via the concept of sanctity does not exclude other aspects of their thought. This

exploration will take us through a variety of mystical themes and issues, all of

which are important and worthy of attention. These elements touch on the

nature of being and mystical knowing, and form the matrix that anchors the

Waf å’ theory of sainthood.

8 Introduction



Tirmidh• on Wal å ya

The earliest thinker to systematically address the subject of sanctity was al-Hak •m al-Tirmidh• (d. cir. 300/910).1 Of course he was not the only thinker to

discuss saints and sainthood; two Iraqi contemporaries, al-Kharråz (d. 286/899)

and Ibn Ab• al-Dunyå (d. 281/894), also reflected on the subject.2 Their work

however, did not approach that of Tirmidh• in coherence or sophistication.3

One eleventh-century writer tells us that there were even earlier books written

on sainthood, but that these have been lost.4 These books may have been simple

compilations of sayings by sufi masters on the subject, or thematic collections

of a˙å d • th, or perhaps something more discursive. Since these sources may

never be recovered, we might never be fully able to assess the originality of

Tirmidh•’s contribution to this field. Nevertheless, in his Kit å b khatm al-awliyå ,

(or Kit å b s• rat al-awliyå )5 Tirmidh• presents us with the earliest coherent doc-

trine of walå ya. In light of what we do know was being written at the same

time on the subject, and even later, this book is truly impressive in its detail

and creativity.

Tirmidh• was probably the most prolific writer on mystical topics of his

time. Beyond the Kit å b khatm al-awliyå , there are a number of works pertain-

ing to walå ya that await analysis.6 In spite of his contribution to Islamic mysti-cism, Tirmidh• has always been somewhat on the periphery of the tradition.

Regarding the history of his doctrine of sanctity, it is clear that from the time of

his death at the end of the third/nineth century, up into the seventh/thirteenth,

there is almost no mention made of it. As we shall see below, however, there

were some criticisms of certain sufi doctrines that are described as privileging

Chapter 1

Tirmidh•, Ibn >Arab•, and Others on Sanctity



sainthood over prophecy. We cannot be completely certain, but in most cases it

seems fair to suspect that these are criticisms of Tirmidh•’s teaching that the

sainthood of the Prophet is in one way superior to his prophecy. We shall dis-cuss this doctrine in some detail below. Historically, Tirmidh•’s doctrine of

walå ya (more particularly his theory of the Seal of saints—khatm al-awliyå ’)

finally made its way into currency with the attention given it by Ibn >Arab• in

the midseventh/thirteenth century. It is also of note that al-Shådhil•—who

probably had not read Ibn >Arab•—held Kit å b khatm al-awliyå in high regard

and read it with his inner circle of followers (see chapter 2).

Another factor in Tirmidh•’s relative obscurity was the fact that he was an

“Easterner,” that is, he was from Tirmidh, south of Samarqand, in present-day

Uzbekistan, as opposed to the dominant center of Baghdad. Little is known of

the details of his life, including his education. Of particular interest to our sub-

ject at hand is the religious milieu of Khuråsån. It seems that Tirmidh• partici-

pated in the spiritual debates of his time. By the end of the third/nineth century

the asceticism ( zuhd ) that had dominated the early devotional landscape, in

Khuråsån and elsewhere, had largely been displaced by the Malåmatiyya

movement (established in Nishåp¥r by Óamd¥n al-Qaßßår d. 271/884). This

movement stressed malå mat al-nafs, subjecting the lower-self, or ego, to blame

with the intention of diminishing it.7 Although the debates of the time have leftlittle record of themselves, there do exist letters from Tirmidh• in which he crit-

icizes the Malåmatiyya.8 In general, he objects to the great attention this group

devotes to their nafs and accuses them of underestimating the role of faith in

spiritual development. Another important school of the time in Nishåp¥r was

the ascetic-minded Karråmiyya, established by Mu˙ammad Ibn Karråm (d.

255/869).9 Undoubtedly, Tirmidh• would have disapproved of their emphasis

on asceticism, but he seems to have made no direct mention of them.

With regard to his theory of walå ya, Tirmidh• presents a novel understandingof a number of elements. First, he distinguishes between the divine communi-

cation to the prophet and that to the saint. The general theological position is

that a prophet is inspired by wa y and that a saint is inspired by ilhå m. Tir-

midh• elaborates on this, adding that revelation reaches the prophet as God’s

kalå m (speech) and the saints as God’s ˙ad • th (speech).10

The difference between prophethood and [sainthood] is that prophet-

hood consists of speech (kalå m) which detaches itself from God as

revelation (wa y), and it is accompanied by a spirit (r ¥˙) from God.

Revelation comes to an end and God seals it with the spirit and the

spirit causes (a prophet) to accept it.11 Moreover, this must be accepted

as true. If anyone were to reject it, he would be an infidel because he

would have rejected the word (kalå m) of God. As for the one pos-

sessed of [sainthood]—God is in charge of the speech (˙ad • th) (he

hears)12 from the celestial treasure chambers, and God causes it to

10 Sanctity and Mysticism in Medieval Egypt



reach him. Thus he receives supernatural speech [˙ad • th]. This super-

natural speech detaches itself from God [and reaches the saint] by

means of a tongue [of truth], and accompanying supernatural speech(˙ad • th) is God-inspired peace of mind (sak • na)13 which occurs in the

heart of the man drawn to God [majdh¥b].14

So the saints have their own connection to the divine, distinct from that of the

prophets. It is also mentioned that the message received by the prophet may

not be rejected by the believer. Tirmidh• mentions in a following passage that

the speech received by the saint is useful, but its acceptance is not obligatory

for the believer. He says that “if anyone rejects it, he is not an infidel. And yet

in rejecting it, he will suffer failure and undergo evil consequences, and his

heart will be confounded.”15 It is later explained why ignoring the saint who

has received ˙ad • th is a bad idea.

As for the man who hears [˙ad • th], the [˙ad • th] he hears is divine

support and an increase of awareness with regard to the Holy Law of

the messenger (˝mßn©H ]u∂nå D† ]kdƒ Vh∂B M vÜ∂∫∆ |© |e∂vπ). When he [the saint]

dispenses that awareness to the servants of God, this is a means and a

direction to God which he [the saint] disposes over. Whoever rejectshim [the saint] loses his blessing [baraka] and his light, for this is a

matter of a righteous guide who points the way to God.16

Here we see Tirmidh• laying out the distinction between the authority of

prophecy and that of sainthood.17 Both are of divine inspiration, and the lower

assists in understanding the Law brought by prophecy, but the authority of

sainthood is not binding upon the believing community. This is a significant

point, which will be taken up later by Ibn>

Arab•

and also the early Shå

d-hiliyya. The epistemology of walå ya is thus twofold. Mystical knowledge

entails not only an understanding of spiritual realities (e.g., experience of the

divine, merging of the self with the eternal, etc.), but it also bestows insight

into the seemingly more mundane reality of God’s Law on earth.18

In addition to this distinction between prophecy and walå ya, Tirmidh•

also describes two grades of sainthood. As in the distinction between walå ya

and nubuwwa, this difference hinges on modes of communication from the

Divine. There are those saints, mentioned above, who receive ˙ad • th, and

there are those who only converse ( yunå j¥na) with God. Tirmidh•’s unknowninterviewer asks, “You have described the difference between the prophet

and those who receive ˙ad • th. What then are the other saints like?” He answers

as follows:

The people of the Way converse (m“hk∂) [with God], while those who

receive ˙ad • th are thus informed (m´vp∂). I explained this ˙ad • th to

Tirmidh• , Ibn > Arab• , and Others on Sanctity 11



you earlier. Converstation [with God], on the other hand is a gift

(> a†å ’). The recipient receives utterances (maqå lå t ) in the form of

light as if someone were saying this or that to him. But with theseutterances are neither . . . the Spirit [by which the prophets are

informed], nor the God-inspired peace of mind [found in those who

receive ˙ad • th]. Thus, the recipient experiences doubt and is not sure

whether the Enemy (Satan) is in some way associated with it or

whether the lower soul, with its deception and cunning wiles, is min-

gled in it.19

Like the greater, this lesser sainthood is of divine origin, but without the God-

inspired sak • na to accompany it, its bearer is unsure. One who holds the lesser

sainthood is informed by “utterances,” in contrast to the superior communica-

tion, which would have been by ˙ad • th. This “conversation” with God is not

confirmed by the accompanying form of Spirit known as sak • na. These lesser

saints, because they cannot be sure of their communications, are thus not able

to offer the guidance in matters of Law that their superiors can.

The following hierarchy is established. At bottom is the class of monothe-

ists made up of the pious (> ubbå d ), the ascetics ( zuhhå d ),20 and so on. Then

there is the first level of saints, those whose dialogue with God is left uncon-firmed either by sak • na or by the divine Spirit. This is followed by the higher

saints, whose ˙ad • th is confirmed; and finally there is the level of the

prophets/messengers, whose kalå m is confirmed by the Spirit. Tirmidh•, in his

description of this hierarchy, also presents a cumulative relationship between

the levels. In other words, the powers of the lower levels are included in those

of the higher. “The mu˙addath receives ˙ad • th, and fir å sa (clairvoyance), and

ilhå m (inspiration) and truthfulness. The prophet has all this as well as

prophethood, and in turn the messenger has all this and messengerhood. Theothers from among the saints (i.e. those of najwa and the maqå lå t ) have only

fir å sa, ilhå m, and truthfulness.”21 Thus, although the mode of divine communi-

cation at each of the three levels is distinct—at least in name—each one leads

to its superior, with the highest level encompassing the two lower. It is interest-

ing to note the phenomenological element here in Tirmidh•’s epistemology. An

essential element of higher communication with God is the accompanying Spirit:

the r ¥˙ for the prophets and the sak • na for the higher saints. This Spirit is so

important that without either form of it, even though one may be receiving divine

communication, one is not qualified to interpret the Law or to guide souls.

The picture becomes less clear, however, when we introduce another of

Tirmidh•’s novel ideas. This is his second typology of saints. Although we

noted above his distinction between those saints who receive sak • na and those

who do not, this typology is quite distinct. In this scheme the superior saint is

called the “true saint of God” (h Ñ rπ |g©H D©M), and the inferior is the “saint of what




is due to God” (|g©H Rπ D©M).22 The latter is presented as a holy man who controls

his lower self by a discipline of piety and correct behavior. Through these

efforts he puts himself in a position to receive the mercy of God (ra˙ma),which will raise him to a place near God. In contrast, the “true saint of God” is

raised to the divine presence by God’s generosity ( j¥d ). We read,

For the first of them [walå ya] comes forth through divine compassion

(ra˙ma), and God takes it upon Himself to transport him in one

instant from the House of Grandeur to the place of divine proximity

[maqå m al-qurba]. For the second of them [walå ya] comes forth

through divine generosity ( j¥d ), and God takes it upon Himself to

transport him in a single instant from the place of divine proximity

through one realm after another to the Possessor of sovereignty.23

This model of the levels of sainthood follows the system of cumulative walå ya

described earlier. Here, the superior figure has mastered the level reached by

the lesser24 (i.e., reaching the maqå m al-qurba), but for him this is only the

first step. His final stage is reached once divine generosity has taken him to

the next level. In this model, against the ascetics and Malåmatiyya, we see

Tirmidh• again prioritizing divine election over individual effort. That is to say,spiritual discipline is only a first step in the ascent to God.

Another important element in Tirmidh•’s theory of sanctity is the assem-

bly (d • wå n) of saints. He is certainly not the first to describe this assembly,

since versions of it are mentioned in the hadith literature. One tradition,

known as the “hadith of >Abd Allåh ibn Mas>ud” describes the assembly of

356 saints: 300 are “on the heart of” Adam, 40 on that of Moses (or Noah), 7

on Abraham, 5 (or 4) on the angel Gabriel, 3 on Michael, and 1 on the heart of

Isråf •l, the angel of resurrection. When one of them dies, one below takes hisplace. The single one is commonly called “qutb” (pole) or “ghawth” (rescue),

with the abd å l (replacements) (either 40 or 7) and si∂∂• q¥n (sincere) referring

either to a class or to saints in general.25 The idea of an assembly of 40 saints

certainly predates Islam. Goldziher points to the 40 martyrs of Sebastian as a

precedent.26 The Qur’an mentions the number 40 for the most part in relation

to Moses.27

This assembly, according to Tirmidh• and later Muslim thinkers, plays an

important role in the preservation of life here on earth. In one passage he says,

“These forty are the guarantee of protection for the (Muslim) community.

Through them the earth exists and through them the people pray for rain.

When they die, the community will suffer what it has been threatened with.”28

So the assembly of saints seems to play an intercessory role for the commu-

nity. Elsewhere, Tirmidh• describes the end of the rule of the assembly of forty

and the subsequent rise of the Seal of saints.




Then when God took his Prophet unto Him, He caused forty strictly

faithful men (si∂∂• q¥n) to emerge in His community. Through them

the earth exists, and they are the people of His house and His family.Whenever one of them dies, another follows after him and occupies

his position, and so it will continue until their number is exhausted

and the time comes for the world to end. Then God will send a [saint]

whom He has chosen and elected... and He will bestow on him every-

thing he has bestowed upon the [other saints] but He will distinguish

him with the Seal [of Sainthood] with God (khå tim al-walå ya). And

he will be God’s proof (˙ujjat Allå h) against all other [saints] on the

Day of Judgement. By means of this Seal he will possess the sincerity

of [sainthood] with God, the same way that Mu˙ammad possessed

the sincerity of prophethood.29

Here we have first a restatement of the dependence of the world upon the forty.

The existence of the community seems to be tied to prophetic revelation and

saintly inspiration. The time Mu˙ammad was on earth has ended—and thus so

has prophetic revelation; the community is then sustained for a period by the

forty. Tirmidh• does not elaborate on these forty, rather his primary concern

seems to be their Seal. This figure, at the end of the above passage, has his roleexplicitly compared to that of Mu˙ammad, the Seal of the prophets. With this

figure Tirmidh• provides us with a third level of saint. Not only is this Seal of

sainthood superior, but he also has an apocalyptic function. We are told that

when these forty die, the community will “suffer what it has been threatened

with,” that is, divine judgment and retribution—judgment day. The Seal will

appear at the end of time.

The spiritual authority of this Seal is based first on his passing through

God’s attributes and reaching the divine essence. Tirmidh• says,

[In the realm of each divine name] there is an assembly of intimate

converse (najwå ) and gifts of honour for the people of that realm.

And there God has made stations for the hearts of His chosen few.

They are the ones who go forward from the place [of divine proxim-

ity] to God’s realm. Many [a saint] has his station in God’s first realm

. . . and many [have] advanced to a station in the second, third or

fourth realm of God. And whenever [one] advances to another realm,

the name of that realm is bestowed on him until he is such that he has

advanced through all these realms to the realm of Unicity and Single-

ness (mulk al-wa˙d å niyya al-fardiyya) . . . He is the chief [sayyid ] of

the [saints of God] and he possesses the seal of [sainthood] from his

Lord . . . He has reached God’s interior [bå† in].30




Thus, the Seal has access to the most intimate contact with God. Tirmidh• then

raises the question of the relationship between this sainthood and prophethood.

In describing the Seal he says, “He is very close [in rank] to the prophets, infact he has almost attained their status”31 and describes him as drawing on the

treasure chambers of the prophets. Tirmidh• concludes, “Indeed, the covering

has been removed for him from the stations of the prophets, and from their

ranks, and from their gifts and their rare presents.” Elaborating on this relation-

ship between the Seal and prophethood, Tirmidh• describes the levels of partic-

ipation in nubuwwa accorded to the various levels of walå ya. He writes,

“[T]here are ranks amongst those drawn to God (majdh¥b¥n) and those who

hear (˙ad • th). Some of them have been given one-third of prophethood, while

others have been given half, and others still have been given more. But the

most highly endowed in this respect is the one who possesses the Seal of

(Sainthood).”32 Thus, we see that the boundary between the greatest saint and

the realm of prophecy is rather flexible. This final saint, although he does not

function as a prophet, in some way can access prophethood.

It is also striking to note the parallels Tirmidh• draws between the Seal and

the prophet Mu˙ammad. He describes the Prophet thus:

The first thing God thought was the thought of Mu˙ammad . . . Thenhe was the first, on the [Well-guarded] Tablet (law˙). Then he was the

first in the covenant with God (m• thå q) . . . He will be the first to whom

God speaks (khi†å b). He will be the first to go before God (wif å da) and

the first to practice intercession (shaf å> a).33

Later on, Tirmidh• describes the Seal of saints:

This [saint, the Seal,] was what God thought of first in the primalbeginning . . . Then he was the first on the [Well-guarded] Tablet, then

the first in the Covenant (m• thå q). And then he will be the first on the

Day of Congregation [of the dead] ( yawm al-ma˙shar ), then he will

be the first whom God will address (khi†å b), then the first to go before

God (wif å da), then the first to undertake intercession (shaf å> a).34

Further, in an earlier passage, Tirmidh• mentions that the Seal’s position

among the saints is like that of Mu˙ammad among the prophets.

This model of walå ya is rather simple. Just as there were prophets beforeMu˙ammad, there are saints before the Seal; and just as Mu˙ammad was the

completion of the era of prophecy, the Seal of saints is the completion of the age

of sanctity. Although the Qur’an distinguishes between the prophets (17:55), it

praises those who make no distinctions between them (2:136). However, the




Qur’an does mention Mu˙ammad specifically as the khå tam al-nabiy• n (33:40),

a title that was taken up by hadith scholars in an effort to portray Mu˙ammad as

the superior, rather than simply the final, prophet.35

Regarding Tirmidh•’s doc-trine of the Seal of sainthood, it is clear that it reflects the ideas of both final and

superior. Our discussions above have shown that the Seal of saints is both last

of the saints and also best. In Ibn >Arab•’s model of walå ya, as will be seen

below, there must be more than one Seal of walå ya since there is more than one

kind of walå ya. Ibn >Arab• will also elaborate greatly on the cumulative rela-

tionship mentioned by Tirmidh• in his description of the prophet having his

prophecy in addition to all that the saint has.

Sahl Tustar• on Wal å ya

An important contemporary of Tirmidh•’s was Sahl Tustar• (d. 283/896).

Although he did not influence the understanding of walå ya to the degree Tir-

midh• did, and as we shall see he was probably not read by the Shådhiliyya or

the Waf å’iyya, he did have some interesting things to say about sanctity.

As Tirmidh• has noted, walå ya endows its holder with a unique under-

standing of the Law—but this understanding is not authoritative. In a similarvein Tustar• claims that the mystical understanding of the Qur’an granted to

the saints provides guidance to the community in both the exoteric and esoteric

aspects of scripture.36 He also describes the categories of saints in the d • wå n.

He claims to have met the one thousand five hundred sincere ones (ßidd • q¥n),

and among them the forty substitutes (budalå ’) and the seven pegs (awt å d ).

These classes will become very elaborate three and a half centuries later with

Ibn >Arab•.

In a novel discussion, Tustar• draws on the various forms of the root WLY todescribe the relationship between saints and the prophet Mu˙ammad. He writes,

The walå yat Allå h (friendship with God) is the election (ikhtiyå r ) of

one of whom He takes possession of (istawlå hu). The walå yat al-ras¥l

(friendship with the prophet) is God’s notification of the Prophet that

he is the wal• al-mu’min• n (friend of the faithful). Thus the Prophet is

bound to be a friend ( yuwå lå ) of one whose friend is God (man walå

Allå h).37

Beyond this, Tustar• distinguishes between the himma (spiritual aspiration)38 of

the prophet and that of the saint. It is by this himma, which is clothed in lights,

that the prophets reach the throne of God. In the case of the saints, their himma

is clothed in robes of confirmation (ta’y• d ), and they may only approach the

divine presence thanks to permit passes they have been given.39




In what is certainly his greatest contribution to mystical thought, Tustar•

elaborated on the idea of the Mu˙ammadan Light as the first of God’s cre-

ation.40

The gnostic echoes are clear, yet this concept for later thinkers gaverise to the all-encompassing notion of the Mu˙ammadan Reality. For Tustar•,

this Mu˙ammadan Light, in preexistence, is the source of the prophets and the

elite mystics (the mur å d ¥n versus the mur • d • n). In preexistence they are derived

from Mu˙ammad, which explains their latent spiritual abilities when they are

in creation.41

Lesser Treatments of Wal å ya

Although Tirmidh•’s work on walå ya presented a more or less coherent theory,

and Tustar• had reflected seriously on the subject, most other early sufi thinkers

seem to broach the topic only in passing.42 They did not produce a theory of

walå ya per se. This fact should not surprise us since a quick look at almost any

of the sufi literature of the classical period will show that sanctity itself is not a

separate mystical theme or issue for discussion. Of course all mystical thought

itself is predicated on some kind of sanctity; virtually all reflection on spiritualrealities or spiritual discipline assumes a rapprochement with the divine. It may

be said that whenever God is approached, sanctity becomes an issue. Never-

theless, discussions of the details of a theory of walå ya were not common. One

interesting example is that of the Persian writer >Al• ibn >Uthmån al-Jullåb• al-

Hujw•r• (d. 464/1071). In a wide-ranging survey of sufis and sufi doctrine, he

says of Tirmidh• that “he was one of the religious leaders of his time and the

author of many works on every branch of exoteric and esoteric science. His doc-

trine was based on saintship (walå ya ), and he used to explain the true nature of

saintship and the degrees of saints and the observance of the proper arrange-

ment of their ranks.”43 Despite this promising introduction, Hujw•r•’s account

of Tirmidh• avoids any mention of the Seal of saints.44 This omission, in light

of the high esteem in which Hujw•r• holds Tirmidh•, must have been the result

of self-consorship.

Although a coherent doctrine of walå ya was rare among sufi masters before

the seventh/thirteenth century, by the very nature of their spiritual concerns

they all had something to say on the matter. Simple descriptions of the saints as

God’s elect were common. One early writer of mystical exegesis was Ibn >A†å’(d. 309/921). He interprets S ¥rat al-Mulk (Q. 67:5) “We have adorned the lower

heaven with lamps” as meaning “We have adorned the hearts of the saints with

lights of gnosis (ma> rifa).”45 A simplified presentation of walå ya is found in al-

Kalåbådh•’s well-known sufi manual Kit å b al-ta> arruf . Here he describes two

quite rudimentary levels of sainthood,




The first is merely a departure from enmity, and in this sense is gen-

eral to all believers; . . . it is only to be regarded in a general sense, as

in the phrase “The believer is the friend (wal• ) of God.” The second isa sainthood of peculiar election and choice . . . When a man possesses

this, he is preserved from regarding himself, and therefore he does not

fall into conceit;. . . He is saved from the faults inherent in human

nature, although the stamp of humanity remains in him. . . Neverthe-

less, he will not be divinely preserved from committing lesser or

greater sins [versus a prophet]: but . . . repentance will be close at

hand to him.46

Although al-Kalåbådh• wrote some one hundred years after Tirmidh•, it seems

he never elaborated seriously on the nature of sainthood.

Another significant figure in the history of sufi theory is al-Qushayr• (d.

465/1073). His Riså la is probably the most widely cited work among subse-

quent thinkers. Yet, here too we find an absence of teaching directly on walå ya.

Although he provides a short chapter on walå ya in his Riså la, he does not seem

to add much to our understanding. In one passage he compares the passive to

the active nature of walå ya. He tells us, “The word “saint” has two meanings: in

its passive sense it means he whom God takes care of ( yatawalla) . . . and in itsactive sense it is he who takes care of God’s worship and piety.”47 Further

along, a discussion is provided of the saint being protected (ma f ¥Ω) from grave

sins, as distinct from the prophet being infallible (ma>ß¥m). Turning to another

important thinker, the Persian sufi R¥zbihån Baql• (d. 606/1209), it should be

noted that he had a significant impact on Ibn >Arab• and other mystical theo-

rizers. However, his own writings were much more concerned with accounts of

his dramatic spiritual life than systematic expositions on the theory of walå ya.48

It is interesting to note that Ghazål• (d. 505/1111), in his Kimiyå -i sa>å dat describes the divine knowledge available to both saints and prophets; this is

> ilm ladun• (knowledge from God’s presence). Although Ghazål• does not elab-

orate on walå ya per se, it seems this kind of knowledge would be key in any

understanding of sanctity. He also mentions that the common people may par-

tially access this knowledge from God’s presence through their dreams.49 This

is not such a novel idea, however, since in the hadith literature dreams had

been described as part of prophecy. Ab¥ >°så al-Tirmidh• and Ibn Hanbal both

report the following: “Anas ibn Målik related: The messenger of Allåh said:

Mission (riså la) and prophecy have come to an end and there will be no mes-

senger or prophet after me. (Målik) said: This fell hard upon the people. (The

Prophet) said: But the mubashshir å t (remain). They said: Oh messenger of

Allåh, what are the mubashshir å t ? He said: The dream of the Muslim. It is a

part of prophecy.”50 Al-Bukhår• also mentions that “the dream of the believer is

one of 46 parts of prophecy” (Ía˙•˙, A˙k åm, 4).




One recurring issue among sufi theorists was that of the question of the

superiority of the prophet over the saint. In his Kit å b al-kashf wa al-bayå n, al-

Kharråz (d. 286/899) attacks some unnamed sufis for having placed the saintsabove the Prophet. He asserts instead that walå ya existed before nubuwwa

(prophecy), and that nubuwwa simply confers an additional superiority.51 This

criticism is echoed a century later by al-Sarrå j (d. 378/988). He warns against

those unnamed sufis who would situate walå ya over nubuwwa.52 There were a

few early figures who were considered to have held this position, but conclusive

documentation is lacking. Two in particular were al-Dårån• (d. 215/830) and Ibn

Ab• al-Óawår• (d. 246/860).53 It is not clear at this point how we are to under-

stand this accusation. The accusors, al-Kharråz and al-Sarrå j, seem to be refer-

ring to an established doctrine. The only substantive exposition of a walå ya that

might be seen to rival prophecy would be that of Tirmidh•. Elements, noted

above, such as his claim that the Seal of saints receives a substantial portion of

prophecy may have been enough to draw these accusations. We have also noted

that Hujw•r• omitted the Seal of saints in his account of Tirmidh•’s teaching.

However, the target is not necessarily Tirmidh•, since Hujw•r• says, “Certain

Shaykhs formerly composed books on this subject, but they became rare and

soon disappeared.”54 Perhaps an expressed priority of walå ya over nubuwwa

had been made by earlier mystics.55 In a recent work G. Elmore has suggestedthat this issue was the cause célèbre in debates of the tenth century. He sees the

crucifixion of the extatic mystic al-Óallå j (d. 309/922) as marking the final vic-

tory for the tenet of the superiority of the prophet. The centrality Elmore pro-

poses for this issue is intriguing, but the fact that he presents his analysis as

grounds for understanding Ibn >Arab•’s doctrine of the Seal of saints must make

us wonder if things are actually this neat and tidy. The possibility must be held

out, I believe, that this was not a doctrine actually held by anyone. It would not

be the first case of phantom opponents in the history of Islamic thought (e.g.,the Óashwiyya, the Óul¥liyya).56 This issue requires further research, including

a close rereading of the relevant ninth- and tenth-century texts. Because our dis-

cussion here does not address this question, we shall leave this task to others.

Wal å ya and Sh•>ism

The Sh•>• worldview has always hung on an understanding of walå ya particular

to it. Whatever the form taken, Ithnå >Ashar• (Twelver) or Ismå>•l•, a central

tenet of Sh•>ism was recognition of the transfer of religious authority (walå ya)

from the prophet Mu˙ammad to >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib (d. 41/661). This included

both temporal authority, as leader of the community, and spiritual authority.

Recognition of the Sh•>• Imåms, who one after another took up this walå ya, came

to be a central tenet in the Sh•>• doctrine of salvation.




[A]ccording to standard Sh•>• doctrine, its major dogma insists that

only the transfer of wilå ya from Mu˙ammad to >Al• and subsequent

imams makes Islam the “perfect religion” (Sura 5:3). In fact, wilå ya,as adherence to the imams and as recognition of their mission as the

true “holders of the (divine) Command” (¥l• al-amr ) and the exclu-

sive possessors of the true meaning of the Qur’an and the “knowledge

of the hidden” (> ilm al-ghayb), remains the key to salvation, without

which no pious act of obedience to God (†å> a) is truly valid. It is for

these reasons that wilå ya, and not the profession of monotheism

(taw˙• d ) as in Sunn• Islam, appears as the principal “pillar of Islam”

in the classical collections of Sh•>• traditions.57

This cycle of walå ya picks up with >Al• when it was passed on to him by

Mu˙ammad,58 as described in the traditions of Ghad•r Khumm.59 In turn, the

Imåms (the true awliyå ’) initiate their followers into the esoteric reality of

prophecy.60 The parallel with the sufi idea of the rule of saints extending from

the death of Mu˙ammad to the end of the world is clear.

The last of the Imåms, in the Ithnå >Ashari tradition, is understood to remain

alive in occultation (ghayb), awaiting his return at the end of time.61 A further

elaboration on the office of Imam was the belief that in spite of the various his-torical figures to whom it has adhered until 260/874, it is in essence atemporal.

Naß•r al-D•n al-T¥s• (d. 672/1274) described the imam thus: “L’Imam—à sa

mention soit le salut—n’a pas eu de commencement à l’origine; entre temps, il

ne subit ni altération ni changement; il n’a pas de terme à la fin.”62 It will be seen

later, in our discussion of Ibn >Arab•, that a Sunn• understanding of an eternal

walå ya (as represented in the Mu˙ammadan Reality) was possible.

One interesting figure who did make a significant effort to reconcile

Twelver Sh•>ism with sufism was Óaydar Åmul• (d. end of eighth/fourteenth cen-tury). He wrote his J å mi> al-asr å r to reconcile the secrets of God (asr å r Allå h),

the secrets of the prophets, and the secrets of the Imåms (asr å r al-awliyå ’).63 The

work stresses common elements between the two groups, such as the lofty status

recognized for >Al• and affiliations with Ja>far al-Så∂iq, the sixth Imåm, through

early sufi figures such as Óasan al-Baßr• (d. 110/728). But Åmul•’s most signifi-

cant foray into the the sufi concept of ‘walå ya’ was certainly his commentary on

Ibn >Arab•’s Fuß¥ß, called “ Naßß al-nuß¥ß.”64 Here he takes up Ibn >Arab•’s ver-

sion of the Seal of sainthood and inserts the Sh•>• Imams into the model.65

Ibn >Arab• and Wal å ya

Beyond Tirmidh•’s initial discussions of sanctity in the tenth century, the most

important elaboration of the topic came from Ibn >Arab• (d. 638/1240). This




Andalusian mystic left an immense body of writing.66 The best known of his

works are the Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam and the voluminous Al-Fut ¥˙å t al-Makkiyya,

which in modern printings occupies eight volumes.67

In addition to being anavid writer, he also traveled extensively throughout his adult life. He was born

in the city of Murcia in the year 560/1165, into a family of means. The family

moved to Seville, where Ibn >Arab• was educated and probably worked in gov-

ernment service until he left Spain in 590/1193. He studied and taught across

the Maghreb, visited Egypt, Iraq, and Turkey, and spent his last years in Dam-

ascus, where he is buried.68

The thought of Ibn >Arab•, or the Greatest Shaykh (al-shaykh al-akbar ), has

been the subject of a number of academic studies. Some of the earlier highlights

in this field are the contributions of H. Corbin,69 M. Asín Palacios,70 A. E.

>Aff •f •,71 and T. Izutsu.72 Particularly useful additions to the field have been

made recently by W. C. Chittick.73 In our particular subfield of interest, that is

walå ya, the most outstanding study is that of Michel Chodkiewicz, Le Sceau

des Saints (Gallimard, 1986).74 This impressive monograph is the only sus-

tained analysis of sainthood written to date.

The writings of Ibn >Arab• are numerous and often dense. It is not possible

for us to address fully the many insights he brought to Islamic mystical

thought. For example, his understanding of divine self-disclosure (tajall• ) andthe so-called Oneness of Being75 are two important theories we will not explore

here. However, his doctrine of walå ya is certainly central to his mystical

legacy. Chodkiewicz himself says, “It would not be untrue to say that in one

sense Ibn >Arab•, from the first to the last line of his work, never spoke of any-

thing other than sainthood, of its ways and its goals.”76

The d • wå n of saints, for Ibn ‘Arab•, is quite complex. Strictly speaking,

there are 84 classes († abaqå t ) of saints in the assembly of saints. However, the

first 49 differ from the remaining 35. The first group consists of the lesser saintswho are those people who have attained a certain degree of spiritual life. As a

group, their number varies. The second group, that of the 35 levels, is constant

in number—a total of 589 individuals.77 Both groups consist of † abaqå t , which

we may call a “horizontal” system of classes, yet there also exists what we may

call a vertical system of classification. This system is based on the idea of

prophetic inheritance (wir å tha); that is, every saint can be classified according

to the prophet from whom he draws his spiritual inheritance. Chodkiewcz

describes this inheritance as conferring “a precise and visible character on the

behaviour, virtues and graces of the wal• .”78 The most outward manifestation of

a saint’s inheritance is the type of miracles he performs; if he is Moseslike

( M ¥så w• ), then his face or hand might glow (cf. Q. 27:12), if he is an inheritor

of Jesus (>° saw• ) then he might walk on water or raise the dead.79

So the saints may be classed horizontally according to their spiritual func-

tion and vertically according to their distinguishing prophetic inheritance. This




makes for a great variety of specific sainthoods, but the complexity does not

stop there. Ibn >Arab•’s understanding of the assembly of saints claims that

each level a saint reaches includes all the levels below it. That is, if the seventhlevel, for example, is reached, that individual may be found at each preceeding

level. Progress up the † abaqå t , in other words, is cumulative.80 It would appear

then, that with all three elements of classification in play—the inheritance, the

horizontal classes, and the cumulative nature of the latter—the varieties of

sainthood in the d • wå n are innumerable.

For the lower group of saints, its 49 levels consist of spiritual categories

described largely by certain Qur’anic terms, such as “those who submit,” “the

believers,” or “the devout.” To these names are attached interpretations that far

surpass their usual meanings.81 At the top of this horizontal classification is the

level of the malå miyya (men of blame). Within this group are the umanå ’

(trustworthy) and the afr å d (solitaries). Little is known of the trustworthy

“since they behave with creatures according to the normal demands of faith . . .

It is at the Day of Resurrection that their eminent degree will appear to creatures,

while here below they were unknown among men.”82 The category of the soli-

taries includes such figures as the qu† b (pole), awt å d (pegs), abd å l (substitutes),

nuqabå ’ (representatives), nujabå ’ (nobles), and rajabiyy¥n (those whose spir-

itual state only manifests during the month of Rajab). At any point in timethere is only one pole, two imams, four awt å d , and seven abd å l. The pole is

described as “the centre of the circle of the universe . . . the mirror of God, and

the pivot of the world.”83 This pole and the two imams are joined by the substi-

tute of al-Kha∂ir, to form together the four pegs.84

Thus, at the pinacle of the congress of saints we find a group of four mor-

tal saints. But Ibn >Arab• then adds another dimension that ties the d • wå n of the

saints to the realms of prophethood and mission. In short, he claims that these

four pegs are actually only the substitutes of the four true awt å d . These fourare the four living messengers: Idr•s (Enoch), Jesus, Elijah, and al-Kha∂ir.85 So

like the vertical classification mentioned earlier, which produced prophetic

inheritances among the saints, the ultimate saints are essentially messengers

(whose representatives are saints). Ibn >Arab• writes,

These four beings exist in the flesh in this world below, and are its . . .

awt å d . Two of them are the two Imams and one of them is the Pole,

who is the place of God’s beholding on this earth. Messengers have

not ceased and will not cease to be in this world until the Day of Res-

urrection . . . Within this community, there corresponds at all times to

each of these Messengers a being who is “on the heart” of that Mes-

senger and is his deputy (nå ’ib). [Most know these four] only through

these deputies.86




This incorporation of nubuwwa into the congress of saints is far removed from

the d • wå n as conceived by Tirmidh•. It will be remembered that in that earlier

system not only was there no presence of messengers, but the entire congressapparently came into existence only after the death of the prophet Mu˙ammad.

In a final twist, Ibn >Arab• again transforms the apex of the hierarchy of

the congress of saints. He writes, “As for the pole, it is the spirit of Mu˙ammad

(r ¥˙ Mu˙ammad ), by which all the Messengers and all the Prophets are sus-

tained.” Chodkiewicz then concludes, “Idr•s, Elijah, Jesus and Kha∂ir are, like-

wise, simply differentiated projections of the ˙aq• qa mu˙ammadiyya: in a

certain sense, they too are only ‘deputies.’”87

Beyond this description of the d • wå n, Ibn >Arab• takes Tirmidh•’s concept

of the Seal of sainthood and elborates upon it. As we saw above, for Tirmidh•

the Seal is essentially the final saint. But, in Ibn >Arab•’s model, the Seal has

three manifestations. The first is the “Seal of Mu˙ammadan sainthood,” the

second is the “Seal of general sainthood” and the third is the “Seal of chil-

dren.” The Seal of children is not a well-developed idea; it simply signifies the

end of time, being the last human born.88 On the other hand, Mu˙ammadan and

general sainthood are fully developed concepts. Legislative prophecy (nubuwwa

tashr •> ), with the death of Mu˙ammad, has ended. However, general prophecy

continues and is synonymous with walå ya. This walå ya takes two forms,Mu˙ammadan sainthood and general sainthood—each with its own Seal.

This general prophecy (nubuwwa >å mma) is what God leaves open for

humanity’s guidance. Ibn >Arab• writes,

Know that walå ya is an all-inclusive and general function that never

comes to an end, and which brings general [divine] communications.

As for the legsilative function of prophecy and mission, this came to

an end with Mu˙ammad, since there will be no law-bringing prophetafter him or community to receive such, nor any messenger bringing

divine law. This statement is a terrible blow to the friends (awliyå ’) of

God because it implies the cessation of the experience of total and

perfect servanthood . . . God, however, is kind to his servants and has

left for them general prophecy, which brings no law with it. He has

also left to them the power of legislation (tashr •> ) through the exercise

of individual judgement (ijtihå d ) concerning rules and regulations.89

In the second half of this passage Ibn >Arab• is implying that the saints,

referred to here as his servants, through general prophecy, have a function in

legislative interpretation. Ibn >Arab• goes on to describe this function of inter-

preter as it is found in Mu˙ammad. It is through the same walå ya (or nubuwwa

>å mma) mentioned above left for the saints that Mu˙ammad interprets the




divine law that he himself—in his function as messenger—has brought. We

read,

When the Prophet speaks on matters that lie outside the scope of law,

he is then speaking as a saint and a gnostic, so that his station as a

knower [of truth] is more complete and perfect than that as a [mes-

senger] or lawgiver. If you hear any of the [People of God] transmit-

ting sayings from him to the effect that Saintship is higher than

Prophecy, he means only what we have just said. Likewise if he says

that the saint is superior to the prophet and the [messenger], he means

only that this is so within one person. This is because the [messen-

ger], in his Saintship, is more prefect than he is as a prophet or a

[messenger]. It does not mean that any saint coming after him is

higher than he.90

So Mu˙ammad can function through sainthood or through his prophecy. His

prophecy, however, is limited to a time and place, but walå ya is universal and

timeless. So within his person (or within that of any other prophet or messen-

ger), sainthood is superior to prophecy; but an individual who has sainthood,

but not prophecy or mission, is not superior to one who possesses prophecy, ormission. This is the case because riså la and nubuwwa are cumulative. In other

words, the messenger has mission, prophecy and sainthood; the prophet has

prophecy and sainthood; the saint has only sainthood.91

This is the genius of Ibn >Arab•’s doctrine of sainthood. Here walå ya is

extended far beyond the usual understanding of the saint. Unlike the doctrines

that preceeded it, this version of sainthood does not speak of a graying of the

line between the ultimate saints and the lower functions of the prophets, it

rather expands walå

ya into a universal medium—it becomes the hyle in whichall else operates.92

As we mentioned earlier, there are three Seals. The Seal of the children we

have mentioned. As for seals of sainthood, one seals general sainthood, while

the other seals Mu˙ammadan sainthood. Ibn >Arab• describes them,

There are in fact two Seals, one with which God seals sainthood in

general and another with which He seals Mu˙ammadan sainthood.

>°så [i.e. Jesus] is the Seal of Sainthood in an absolute sense. He is the

saint who par excellence possesses the non-legislative prophetic func-

tion in the time of this Community [i.e., the Muslim community] . . .

When he descends at the end of time, it will be as the heir and the

Seal, and after him there will be no saint to be the holder of prophet-

hood in general . . . The office of the Seal of Mu˙ammadan Sainthood

belongs to an Arab . . . I met him in 595 AH . . . As God has sealed




legislative prophethood through Mu˙ammad, through the Mu˙am-

madan Seal he has sealed the sainthood which comes from the Mu-

˙ammadan heritage, not the sainthood which comes from the heritageof other prophets.93

So walå ya from the heritage of the prophet Mu˙ammad (note the return of the

vertical classification) is sealed in the time of Ibn >Arab•. Yet general walå ya

continues, manifested among those saints who inherit from prophets other than

Mu˙ammad. This walå ya will continue to be manifested until the end of time,

at which point it will be sealed by Jesus. The identity of this seal of Mu˙am-

madan sainthood is unclear. As noted above, Ibn >Arab• claims to have met

him, but elsewhere he claims himself to be this figure.94 >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib,

although not specifically called the Seal of Mu˙ammadan sainthood, may also

be the continuation of this walå ya. In an important passage >Al• is singled out

as the closest of all humanity to Mu˙ammad, and most disposed to carrying on

the Prophet’s sanctity.95

In his description of the seal of saints Ibn >Arab• describes a figure who

subordinates himself to the law, but in reality possesses a more immediate link

to God. In discussing the hadith account of a vision Mu˙ammad had in which

he was the missing brick (i.e., the seal) in a wall symbolizing prophethood, Ibn>Arab• adds the vision of the seal of (Mu˙ammadan) sainthood, here seeing

two bricks. He recounts,

The reason for his seeing two bricks is that, outwardly, he follows

the Law of the Seal of [Messengers], represented by the silver brick.

This is his outer aspect. . . Inwardly, however, he receives directly

from God what he appears [outwardly] to follow. . . He derives his

knowledge from the same source as the angel who reveals it to the[Messenger].96

Thus the seal appears to be essentially superior. Further, this seal of saint-

hood—in light of the cessation of prophecy and mission—also becomes the

medium by which the messengers acquire their knowledge of God.

[N]one of the prophets and [messengers] can attain to [knowledge of

God] except from the Niche (mishk å t ) of the Seal of the (Messen-

gers), nor are any of the saints able to attain to it except from theNiche of the Seal of Saints, so that, in effect, none of the [messen-

gers] can attain to it, when they do so, except from the Niche of the

Seal of Saints. This is because the office of [messenger] and prophet

(by prophet I mean the bringer of Sacred Law) comes to an end,

while Sainthood never ceases. Thus the [messengers], as being also




saints, attain only to what we have mentioned from the Niche of the

Seal of Saints, this being even more the case with the lesser saints. 97

This passage makes it clear that the Seal of sainthood is in reality that by

which prophets and messengers—through their walå ya—attain knowledge of

God.98 However, this lofty function of the Seal of sainthood is in a sense neu-

tralized. It appears that the Seal of sainthood is in essence simply one aspect of

the Seal of messengers. This shift marks the introduction of the eternal, univer-

sal Mu˙ammadan Reality (or Mu˙ammadan Spirit). Ibn >Arab• writes, “As for

the Seal of Saints . . . this sainthood is among the excellencies of the Seal of

Messengers, Mu˙ammad.”99 In a particularly relevant passage, Ibn >Arab• sig-

nals that this Mu˙ammadan Reality is the source for all the highest spiritual

offices: “This Mu˙ammadan Spirit has places in the universe where it mani-

fests itself. The most perfect (of these places) are the Pole of (each) Time, the

afr å d , the Mu˙ammadan Seal of Sainthood and the Seal of Universal Saint-

hood, Jesus.”100 Thus, these figures are simply the various representatives for

the Mu˙ammadan Reality; and the apparent superiority of the seal of sainthood

over the prophets and messengers just mentioned is only a priority among

aspects of the Mu˙ammadan Reality. This superiority is not that of one individ-

ual over another, but rather that of walå ya over nubuwwa within the Mu˙am-madan Reality.

This universal Mu˙ammad is described elsewhere in cosmological terms.

We read, “The first being to be endowed with existence was . . . the ‘divine

calamus’, the ‘first Intellect’ who is also the ‘Mu˙ammadan Reality’ or the

‘Reality out of which all things were created’.”101 This Reality is also the

medium of divine creation: “The Spirit attributed to God (Q. 32:8, where it is

said that God breathed “His Spirit” into Adam) is the Mu˙ammadan Reality.”102




As mentioned in the introduction, the Waf å’iyya order is a derivative of the

Shådhiliyya order. In chapters 4 and 5 it will be seen in detail the ways by

which >Al• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’ carried on, or diverged from, Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•’s teachings on sainthood. The task of the chapter at hand is to explore

these original Shådhilite teachings. Our exploration will touch first on the Shåd-

hiliyya order itself, its main proponents, and its primary literature. Further, an

attempt will be made to outline what might be called a “Shådhiliyya-specific”

doctrine of walå ya. Of course it must be remembered that in speaking of the

“doctrine” of this sufi order, we are not necessarily describing teachings that

are exclusive to the Shådhiliyya or that are wholly consistent with all other

writings produced within the order. It must be remembered, too, that the saintly

founder was not a full-time theologian, and his teachings are not necessarily

systematic. These and other teachings of the order often elude any systematiza-

tion on the part of researchers not only because of the oral (and often anec-

dotal) nature of the record of the words of al-Shådhil•, but also because these

teachings are elaborated upon by later leaders of the order. This dilemma is the

same for many schools of thought, mystical or not, where a charismatic

founder is held up as the fountainhead of a movement, when in fact subsequent

minds have contributed much. This challenge to discern the primary teaching

of a founder (e.g., founder of a legal school, a sectarian leader, etc.) as distinctfrom later elaborations is important. Yet of greater significance is the under-

standing of the amalgam of ideas that is produced by this process. For example,

academic research on the historical Jesus is often fascinating, but this informa-

tion does not tell us much about Christian thought, doctrine, or even the early

church. The point here is simply that any discussion of the teachings of the

Chapter 2

The Early Shådhiliyya and Sanctity



Shådhiliyya order will be necessarily a fuzzy delineation of doctrine. Also, it

will not suffice to only reproduce the hagiographical record of the saint’s pro-

nouncements on walå ya; the contributions of the writings of the recognizedleaders of the order after him must also be taken into consideration.

The roots of the Shådhiliyya are to be found in the Maghreb. It is here

that the founder, Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•, was born of a sharifan family and

established himself as a leader. Having come originally from the tribal area of

Ghumåra in Morocco (south of Ceuta), born around 583/1187,1 al-Shådhil•

probably moved to Tunis as a boy. The events of his early life are obscure, but

it is clear that he was educated and that he came to nurture contacts with estab-

lished shaykhs in Tunis.2 The young Shådhil• relates that his search for the

“qu† b of the age”3 took him to Iraq, where he was told by the saintly figure

Ab¥ al-Fat˙ al-Wåsi†• (d. 632/1234) to return to his native Ghumåra. Here al-

Shådhil• became the follower of >Abd al-Salåm Ibn Mash•sh (or Bash•sh) (d.

622/1225).4 Ibn Mash•sh himself had been the student of the greatest Maghrebi

saint, Ab¥ Madyan (d. 595/1198).5

At an undetermined point in time al-Shådhil• came to be associated with the

village of al-Shådhila, some seventy kilometers south of Tunis. This association

was due to his frequent retreats to a nearby cave in Jabal Zaghwån.6 Having

established a following in Tunis, al-Shådhil• traveled to Egypt, in 642/1244.7 It isin Egypt that the Shådhiliyya order saw its greatest flowering. Here many

important figures came to the order, both in Alexandria and Cairo. Before dis-

cussing these figures, however, let us take a moment to survey the literature

written by and about these individuals.

Literature and History of the Shådhiliyya

The Shådhiliyya order was for the first seventy years or so after its founder’s

death headed by a recognized inheritor of leadership, or khal• fa. The succes-

sion line descended from al-Shådhil• (d. 658/1259) to al-Murs• (d. 686/1287)

to Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar• (d. 709/1309) and to Då’¥d Ibn Båkhilå (d.

733/1332). This line of succession should not be taken too literally, however.

After the indisputable succession of al-Murs•, having been appointed by al-

Shådhil• himself, the order quickly spread beyond the confines of its first ribå†

in Alexandria. In a few decades no single shaykh could convincingly claim to

be the head of the entire order in Egypt and the Maghreb.8 Returning to thequestion of the literature of the order, it should first be noted that al-Shådhil•

himself left no systematic writings. His most important compositions were his

supplications (du>å ). Many of these are preserved, along with letters of guid-

ance written by al-Shådhil• to followers back in Tunis, in the work Durrat al-

asr å r wa tu fat al-abr å r by Mu˙ammad Ibn Ab• al-Qåsim al-Himyar•, or Ibn




al-Íabbågh (d.724/1323 or 733/1332). The author of this hagiography, of

whom we know virtually nothing, compiled accounts of Shådhili’s life and

death, miracles, letters to followers in Tunis, supplications, injunctions, andelaborations on certain traditional mystical ideas. Ibn al-Íabbågh’s composi-

tion is of great value, despite the occasional borrowing from the work of Ibn

>A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•, due to its Maghrebi orientation. The only other substan-

tial hagiography of al-Shådhil• was composed by Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar•,

which is certainly Egyptian in orientation. This work, entitled La†å ’if al-minan,

includes hagiographical accounts of the author’s shaykh, al-Murs•,9 along with

those of al-Shådhil•. In the first chapter Ibn >A†å’ Allåh makes mention of the

earlier notices on al-Shådhil• by al-Qas†alån• (d. 686/1287), Ab¥ >Abd Allåh

ibn al-Nu>åm (d. 682/1284), >Abd al-Ghaff år ibn N¥˙ (d. 708/1308)10 and Íaf •

al-D•n ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r (d.682/1283).11

In addition to these two hagiographies, the Durrat al-asr å r and the La†å ’if

al-minan, there now appears to be a third primary source for the teachings of

al-Shådhil•. It is a rather short exposition on a number of traditional sufi ideas,

such as intercession, sin, mystical vision, gnosis, and so on. The text in manu-

script form is cataloged under the following title: Riså lat al-Shaykh Ab¥ al-

Ó asan al-Shå dhil• .12 Of the fifty-six sections that make up this work, I have

been able to locate five in the Durrat al-asr å r , and none in the La†å ’if al-minan. With the facts available to us at present, it is not possible to know which,

of the Durrat al-asr å r or the Riså lat al-Shaykh Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• , is the

earlier source. Despite the questions of priority and the anonymous nature of

the original compiler, the Riså la has not receded into obscurity; in fact, the

entirety of the manuscript is reproduced in Ibn >Ayyåd, al-Maf å khir al-> aliyya f •

ma’å thir al-Shå dhiliyya.13 Note should also be made here that the hagiographi-

cal and doctrinal material presented in Ibn Båkhilå’s al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya con-

cerning al-Shådhil• is drawn from La†å ’if al-minan.In addition to these primary sources there exist also a number of signifi-

cant works that have served as elaborations on the doctrines of the Shådhilite

school. Among these, the better known would be A˙mad Zarr¥q (d. 900/1494)

Qawå> id al-taßawwuf 14 and al-Suy¥†• (d. 911/1505), Ta’y• d al-˙aq• qat al-> aliyya

wa tashy• d al-† ar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya.15

The biographical dictionaries, from the eighth/fourteenth century onward,

invariably contain entries on al-Shådhil•. The earliest substantial entry is to be

found in the Mir’å t al-janå n of al-Yåfi>•, (d. 768/1367).16 Later hagiographical

compilations, drawing variously on all of these sources, include the abovementioned al-Maf å khir al-> aliyya. This work contains accounts of al-Shådhil•’s

life and miracles, his sayings, his supplications, and various commentaries.

The author, Ibn >Ayyåd, remains unknown to us, but from his having quoted of

al-Munåw• (d. 1031/1622), we can place him in the latter half of the eleventh/

seventeenth century.17 The famous Egyptian scholar >Abd al-Óal•m Ma˙m¥d

The Early Shå dhiliyya and Sanctity 29



(d. 1978) produced al-Madrasa al-Shå dhiliyya al-˙ad • tha wa imå muhå Ab¥

al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• in 1967. Of all these later compilations, the most impres-

sive is surely the 1951 publication by >Al• Sålim al->Ammår entitled Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• (2 vols.), also in Egypt.18

Beyond the hagiographies composed, the early Shådhiliyya was informed

by the discourses on mystical thought produced by Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•.

His most famous work is certainly his collection of aphorisms known as al-

Ó ikam al-> A†å ’iyya.19 This poetic masterpiece has circulated throughout the

Muslim world and has been the subject of a number of commentaries. Ibn >A†å’

Allåh al-Iskandar• also composed Mift å˙ al-falå˙, a manual of sufi devotional

practice with an extensive discussion of invocation (dhikr ).20 Other important

works include a meditation on the name of God, entitled al-Qaßd al-mujarrad

f • ma> rifat al-Ism al-Mufarrad,21 and al-Tanw• r f • isqå† al-tadb• r .22 The impact

of Ibn >A†å’Allåh on the Shådhiliyya order would be hard to overstate. Due to

the strength of his writings and his position as the most prominent student of

al-Shådhil•’s successor al-Murs•, it is through him that the order assumed much

of the character it did.23

Al-Shådhil•, Tirmidh•, and Ibn >Arab•

As noted in chapter 1, al-Óak •m al-Tirmidh• and Ibn >Arab• had much to say

about walå ya, among other mystical topics. An important question then is,

What are the connections between these thinkers and the Shådhiliyya? Further

along we will see that Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ read both Tirmidh• and Ibn

>Arab• directly, but to what extent did the Shådhiliyya order take up these ideas

and become a medium for their interpretation and transmission?

We do have some clear notices that al-Shådhil• read Tirmidh•’s Kit å bkhatm al-awliyå ’. The La†å ’if al-minan recounts a story of al-Murs• miracu-

lously traveling to Alexandria in order to sit with al-Shådhil• while he reads the

Kit å b khatm al-awliyå ’.24 In the same hagiography we also read of al-Shådhil•

listing fifteen kar å må t al-qu† b, that is, the miracles worked by the highest

saint, which serve as proofs of his superiority. To this account Ibn >A†å’Allåh

adds, “This [list functions] like that which al-Tirmidh• mentioned in his book

Kit å b khatm al-awliyå ’; namely, he asked one making false claims to walå ya,

“Describe to us the stations of the saints.” After this he [Tirmidh•] posed a

number of questions to this pretender to walå ya.”25

Further on the question of intertext, we note that Ibn >A†å’Allåh elsewhere

offers two quotations directly from Ibn >Arab•,26 and also Ibn >Arab•’s recount-

ing of the story of a vessel, destined for use in the privy, speaking at a dinner

table.27 In addition, it is mentioned that al-Shådhil• was familiar with one Ab¥

al->Ilm Yas•n, who is identified as a disciple of Ibn >Arab•.28 More interesting




though is the account of a meeting between al-Shådhil• and Íadr al-D•n al-

Q¥naw• (d. 672/1273), a well-known student and commentator on Ibn >Arab•.

The encounter is described thus:

When the shaykh Íadr al-D•n al-Q¥nåw• came to Egypt as an envoy

(!mßN), he met with Shaykh Ab¥ al-Óasan [al-Shådhil•]. He [al-

Q¥naw•] spoke in the presence [of al-Shådhil•] on many different sci-

ences. The shaykh [al-Shådhil•] waited with his head bowed for

al-Q¥naw• to finish. Then he raised his head and asked, “Tell me

(§ƒMnføı) where the Pole of the age is today, and who is his sincere com-

panion, and what things does he know?” To this al-Q¥naw• was silent

and offered no answer.29

Unfortunately Ibn >A†å’ Allåh provides no further commentary on this story.

The late Paul Nwyia understood this account as a rejection by al-Shådhil• of

the authority of Ibn >Arab•.30 This understanding assumes that al-Q¥naw• has

been forced to silently concede that the pole of the age is al-Shådhil•, and not

Ibn >Arab•. However, it must be noted that Ibn >Arab• did not claim for himself

the office of qu† b. Further, the timing of this encounter, which must have taken

place after al-Q¥naw•’s second visit to Egypt (i.e., 640/1249), is evidence againstthis being a debate over polehood at all. Ibn >Arab• would at that point have

already been dead two years and thus would no longer have been a candidate

for the office.31

The Early Figures of the Order

In general, it seems fair to say that the Shådhiliyya order is conservative bynature. The charismatic example of its founder excludes both antinomian

behavior and excessive devotional practices. The figure of the saint al-Shådhil•

is rarely presented as demonstrating his spiritual status through the execution

of miracles, although he certainly makes clear claims to being the geatest saint.

It is partly due to this conservative image, and partly to the literary body pro-

vided by Ibn >A†å’Allåh, that this order enjoyed the allegiance of a good number

of important figures in medieval Egypt. Later writers would stress, in their gen-

eral characterizations of Shådhlite thought, and with an eye to certain antisufi

criticisms, that the doctrine of oneness of being (wa˙dat al-wuj¥d ) is absent fromthis order.32

Before moving on to a discussion of these figures we can finish our dis-

cussion of the Shådhiliyya by comparing it to another important order, the

A˙madiyya, founded at about the same time. This † ar • qa is named for its

founder, A˙mad al-Badaw• (d. 675/1276).33 Jean-Claude Garcin characterizes




this order in the fifteenth century as “service oriented” and preserving a rural

element in its identity. In the arena of sufi practice, the order is typified as nur-

turing asceticism and humility, scrupulousness in questions of illicit and licitbehavior, and a tendency to shun those of worldly authority. In contrast, the

Shådhiliyya of this period stressed the instruction of disciples (mur • d • n ), asso-

ciated with those in power, and stressed supplication (du>å ) and sermonizing in

their ritual.34

In Egypt the two centuries following the death of Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskan-

dar•, corresponding roughly with the end of Mamluk rule, were undoubtedly

the golden age of the Shådhiliyya order. This period saw the expansion of a

number of sufi orders. There were also many important writers and thinkers

associated with the Shådhiliyya. The student of Ibn >A†å’Allåh, Taq• al-D•n al-

Subk • (d. 756/1355), wrote a refutation of some of Ibn Taymiyya’s criticisms

of sufism, defending the practice of supplications for the Prophet.35 In adition

to the Shådhil• branch, which descended from al-Murs• to Mu˙ammad Waf å’,

there was the line of the Óanafiyya, which also ran from al-Murs•, but took

another path.36 Mention must also be made of Ab¥ al-Mawåhib Ibn Zaghdån

(or Zaghd¥n) al-T¥ns• (d. 882/1477). He was a Shådhilite who came to associ-

ate himself with the Waf å’iyya. There are over a dozen titles attributed to him,

including one on listening to music and dancing in sufi ˙adras and an accountof the Waf å’ family.37

Between Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’ there was

another Egyptian Shådhil• shaykh of note, Då’¥d Ibn Båkhilå (or Ibn Måkhilå)

al-Shådhil• al-Iskandar•. This Ibn Båkhilå was Mu˙ammad Waf å’s spiritual

director and his initiator into the order. Since this teacher is far less known to

scholarship than his predecessor Ibn >A†å’ Allåh, a discussion of him and his

writings seems appropriate here. Ibn Båkhilå’s best-known work is his > Uy¥n

al-˙aqå ’iq.38

He knew well the hagiographical sources for al-Shådhil• and themiraculous stories and sayings of al-Murs•; so not surprisingly, in his writings

he quotes from them with no substantial mention of other saints. In his discus-

sions of walå ya he echos much of the complexity of Ibn >A†å’Allah’s treatment

of the subject in the latter’s La†å ’if al-minan. We may say that Ibn Båkhilå’s

conception of walå ya was thoroughly “Shådhilite.” He wrote within the literary

context of this order, reflecting his earlier teachers, and sought to present these

mystical doctrines to those who would follow the order. His commentary on al-

Shådhil•’s Ó izb al-ba˙r , entitled al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya,39 was not only the first

systematic commentary on this quasi-sacred text—a fact which certainly served

to underscore his own spiritual authority within the order—but also it provided

him the occasion to authoritatively interpret the essentials of Shådhilite mysti-

cism. As we shall see, these essentials have a lot to do with walå ya.

Ibn Båkhilå’s own writings tell us nothing of the details of his life. One

typically hagiographical account, which seems to have been put into circulation




early, tells us that Ibn Båkhilå was an illiterate guard of the household of the

governor of Alexandria. In spite of his low standing, the governor came to rec-

ognize his saintly authority to such an extent that the two men had a peculiaragreement worked out. When the governor held court, Ibn Båkhilå

used to sit facing him. They shared a system of signals by which the

governor would be told whether an accused was guilty or innocent.

Ibn Båkhilå’s signs were that if he grasped his beard and pulled it to

his chest, the governor would know that the accused was guilty, and if

he pulled it upwards, then the accused was innocent.40

This device of the saint wielding the true power behind the mundane worldly

authorities is a popular one in sufi hagiographies. However, it seems that Ibn

Båkhilå was a rather more substantial intellectual figure than this account sug-

gests. The biographical collections on the Målik • jurists of the period offer a

more substantial portrait. We are told that

at a young age [Ibn Båkhilå] studied at the Kihåriyya school in Cairo

. . . which today is know as the Jåmi> Jawdar•, in Jawdariyya Íagh•ra.

In this mosque >Umar ibn Idr•s is burried. [Ibn Båkhilå] then movedto Alexandria, where he became the companion of Ab¥ al->Abbås al-

Murs• . . . and from whom he learned a love of sufism. After [the

shaykh’s] death, he followed his student Yåq¥t al->Arsh•. While in

Alexandria he studied at Masjid Badr al-D•n al-Jamål• [in the

>A††åriyya]. Once he finished his studies he went on to the canonical

[summary] court (mu˙kama shar > iyya) as a chamberlain (˙å jib); he

then rose to become clerk (k å tib jalsa), a position he held until his

death . . . (Ibn Båkhilå) died in Alexandria in 733ah

, and is burried inhis zå wiya there, on the street of Tå j al-D•n al->Ådil•.41

So Ibn Båkhilå was an accomplished jurist before he took up the sufi path. The

breadth of his learning is indicated by the fact that to him are attributed both a

summary of a work by al-Qå∂• >Abd al-Wahhåb and a summary of a work on

grammar by al-Zajjå j•, in addition to smaller works on fiqh and rhetoric.42

The Writings of Ibn Båkhilå

Of the shaykh’s two extant works, his > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq is certainly more in the

inspired mystical style one might expect from the head of a sufi order. It con-

tains neither an introduction nor a conclusion, appearing to be a nonthematic

compilation of Ibn Båkhilå’s utterances in the “wa qå la . . .wa qå la . . .” form.




In addition to its discussions of walå ya, it touches on many typical themes of

sufi thought: the levels of divine secrets, exoteric versus esoteric knowledge,

the hierarchies of believers, “humanity” as a spiritual veil, the soul’s struggleagainst the lower self, and the extinction and persistence of the soul in the

divine. In this work Ibn Båkhilå also touches on the progressive Self-disclosure

(tajall• ) of the Divine and the levels of the seen and unseen worlds. Also pre-

sented is an unusual discussion of roles of the Mu˙ammadan darkness and

light.43 This work is in the traditional style of accounts of the teachings of sufi

shaykhs, that is, lengthy compilations of statements on themes without a sus-

tained development.

In contrast to his > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq, Ibn Båkhilå’s al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya

presents us with a much more systematic discussion. The subject here is the

famous du>å (supplication) “Óizb al-ba˙r” by Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•. In the

introduction Ibn Båkhilå supplies a number of basic sufi concepts, along with a

discussion on the variants of the ˙ad • th quds• “Whoever attacks My saint has

made war on Me.”44 In the first of three following sections making up the main

body of the book, Ibn Båkhilå discusses the recognized spiritual benefits of

reciting this prayer. He also presents a number of hagiographical episodes from

the life of its composer. Ibn Båkhilå’s source for these accounts appears to be

Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar•. From this same source he repeats a number of comments on the discipline of the Shådhiliyya order. This section ends with a

lengthy quote from the pro-Shådhilite poetry of al-B¥ß•r•.45

The second section presents the text of Ó izb al-ba˙r 46 along with com-

ments pointing out the Qur’anic sources for certain phrases and explaining cer-

tain vocabulary used. Ibn Båkhilå goes on to recount some of the miraculous

stories of the power of this prayer, which include passengers on the Nile and

the Indian Ocean being saved from storms and travelers being saved from ban-

dits. An interesting point is also taken up here; it centers on the question of how prophets, saints, the learned, and the commoner can all petition God for

forgiveness or protection using the same formula. The question is: Can they be

asking for the same thing? Ibn Båkhilå’s answer will be discussed below.

In the final section the issue of the prayer’s use of Qur’anic phrases is

taken up. In defending the intertextual nature of Ó izb al-ba˙r (and incidentally,

the legitimacy of the divine inspiration of saints like al-Shådhil•) Ibn Båkhilå

makes use of a range of arguments. He draws on fiqh sources (Qå∂• >Iyåd’s dis-

cussion of Mu˙ammad’s use of Qur’anic phrases as supplication),47 theological

arguments (al-Båqillån•’s doctrine of i> jå z, or inimitability of the Qur’an,48

allowing for intertextual use, but insisting that the quote loses it miraculous

nature), and the principles of rhetoric (iqtibå s, or adaptation, in composition

preserving the integrity of the original Qur’anic or hadith source).49

This prayer commentary shows Ibn Båkhilå to have been a well-trained

theologian in addition to being a sufi master. Although Qur’anic commentary




had become a sophisticated science before the Middle Ages, it seems that Ibn

Båkhilå’s al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya was the first sustained systematic commentary

on a sufi prayer. This small branch of “literary sufism” has survived into moderntimes.50

Ibn Båkhilå’s > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq is a compilation of mystical sayings. It

provides no details on the life of Ibn Båkhilå and makes almost no mention of

kar å må t . In contrast, his al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya repeats a number of al-Shådhil•’s

miracles and those of his inspired composition, Ó izb al-ba˙r . This work offers

an additional element in its presenting a record of walå ya. The prayer itself

becomes, to some extent, a vehicle for sanctity. Just as al-Shådhil•’s sainthood is

attested to, so is the divinely inspired nature of the ˙izb. The discussion of

walå ya not only positions the saint carefully in relation to the prophets, messen-

gers, and the common believers, it likewise makes efforts to position the ˙izb in

relation to the Qur’an and simply mundane compositions.

Proximity to the Divine

The concept of walå ya, as it was developed in the early Shådhiliyya, repre-

sents a complex of ideas. In a discussion of walå ya in the thought of Ibn>Arab•, Michel Chodkiewicz points to a number of concepts that were to

remain essential for most mystical thinkers after the second half of the sev-

enth/thirteenth century. For Ibn >Arab•, hagiology is made up of three parts: the

Nature of sanctity, which is based on the notion of proximity (qurba); the

Forms of sanctity, which are based on the prophetic heritage (wir å tha), which

the saints follow in both apparent and esoteric ways; and finally the Functions

of sanctity, which are tied up with the idea of substitution (niyå ba), which

manifests itself in the hierarchy of saints (qu† b, abd å l etc.).51

Although theseideas are to be found in embryonic form in the sufi tradition before Ibn >Arab•,

his elaborations and innovations on these concepts set the tone and direction

for almost all mystical speculation that followed. As discussed in the previous

chapter, he reintroduced the “Seal of the saints,” an echo of the theological

position on Mu˙ammad as the “Seal of the prophets.” The term Seal of the

saints came into wide use after Ibn >Arab•. The Waf å’iyya of Egypt, for example,

took up this idea, with >Al• Waf å’ attributing the title to his father Mu˙ammad

Waf å’, and tying to it the concept of ‘tajd • d ’ (the periodic renewal of the Islamic

religion). This new dimension of the renewer turned the Seal into a cyclical

seal of saints. Not unlike the extension of prophecy via sainthood, which shall

be discussed below, >Al• Waf å’s renewing seal extends the concept of the ulti-

mate saint. We shall discuss the Waf å’iyya in later chapters.

Returning to the analysis proposed by Chodkiewicz, the idea of “proximity”

to the divine is found throughout mystical thought—be it Islamic or not. In the




> Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq we note a few examples of this dimension, which in Islamic

mysticism is often held to be the result of fanå ’ or extinction of the self in

God.52

Ibn Båkhilå tells us that in this spiritual state the gnostic (>å rif ) sees theinvisible realm (ghayb) and that he is thus no longer an “I,” at least until he

regains his normal state. “If the gnostic witnesses the unseen, the Throne [of

God], His foot-stool, or anything else, then he is not a man, rather he is some-

thing other than that which his people know . . . The description of his nature,

when [he is] not a witness of the unseen, is ‘I’.”53 The highest of the gnostics is

he who transcends his own sense of self and of being. Ibn Båkhilå writes,

There are three kinds of servant of God: the servant who does not see

his sin—he is far [from God]; the servant who acknowledges his sin—

he is happy; and the servant who does not see his own existence—he is

the true witness [of God] . . . For any gnostic whose existence does not

die before his spiritual follower, that follower will never reach God.54

This transcendence is thus an essential qualification for the spiritual guide.

Also, thanks to their being closer to the realm of the unseen, the saints are the

only ones in creation who know the esoteric secrets of the Qur’an.55 Mutual

love, between God and his creation, may also lead to this proximity. Al-Shådhil•writes, “He who loves God and is loved by him, his walå ya has been estab-

lished (Ij∂!M Jf´ vr†) . . . He whose walå ya has been established in relation to

God, has no fear of meeting God (in the hereafter).”56

The saints, being closer than the rest of creation to God, act as a barzakh

(intermediary / lit. isthmus) for the divine light. Ibn >A†å’Allåh writes,

[God] sent His light upon the hearts of His saints, and thus the heav-

ens of their spirits were illuminated, along with the earths of theirlower spirits (nuf ¥sihim) and bodily forms . . . He made their hearts

the site of the manifestation of His Essence and the appearance of His

Attributes. He created them that He might appear in them specifically

(h Ñ ∑mwø L id† nizd© L ˆniΩı); He is the Apparent, generally, in all things.

He appears in them by His Secrets and Lights, manifesting in them

and in others by His Power and Might . . . He brings them to Him,

through a gate of truth, by way of extinction ( fanå ) from all that is

other than Him, and sends them out, through a gate of truth, to cre-

ation subsisting (bå q• n) (in God) by His Light and Splendour. Theyare bar å zikh (sing. barzakh) of the Light, and mines of the Secrets.

He connects with them after having cut them off, and separates them

after having united with them.57

This passage reflects the Akbarian emphasis on God having created in order to

be known58 but gives the saints a privileged position in the process of God




If there should occur to your mind anything that puts you at ease,

gives you joy, makes you sad, upon which or on account of which

your mind is laden with care, that is a defect which will cause you tofall from the greatest sainthood (walå ya kubr å ) . . . (Yet) it may be

that you will obtain the lesser sainthood (walå ya ßughr å ) in the ranks

of religious faith and abundance of religious works. In the lesser saint-

hood there are never lacking the whispering and passing thoughts, for

you are far from the lowest heaven and near to Satan and your passion

which listens stealthily, makes suggestions, and gives false reports.

But if you are aided by the stars of knowledge of the faith, the planets

of certainty ( yaq• n), and the constancy of the divine upholding, then

your (greater) sainthood in this matter is achieved.66

It appears that not only are there two levels of sanctity, but that those of lesser

walå ya can benefit from the walå ya of their superiors. Ibn >Abbåd al-Rund• (d.

792/1390), interpreting al-Shådhil•’s cryptic satement, “He who reads this sup-

plication (˙izb), he has what we have, and he is obliged as we are,” says that

the true reader inherits from the saints walå ya, proximity to God and the ability

to perform miracles.67 This idea of ones walå ya in a relationship with the

walå ya of others is not new; the famous Junayd of Baghdad (d. 298/910)stated, “Adherence to this our science is walå ya; if this blessing has escaped

you personally, then do not fail to adhere to it in others.”68 Ibn >Arab• noted the

potential walå ya in all humans, which is at heart simply the rediscovery of the

divine Attributes and Names, in the form of which Adam was created.69

In the La†å ’if al-minan, Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar• describes this sanctity

of two levels. He writes, “There are two kinds of sanctity: one where the saint

takes God as a friend (wal• yatawallå Allå h), and another where it is God who

choses the saint as friend (wal• yatawallå -hu Allå h) . . .70

The first mode repre-sents minor sainthood (walå ya ßughr å ), the second, major sainthood (walå ya

kubr å ).”71 Ibn >A†å’ Allåh elaborates further on the model, noting that one

may say “sainthood of faith” (walå yat al-• må n) and “sainthood of certainty”

(walå yat al-yaq• n); or yet “sainthood of the truthful” (walå yat al-ßå diq• n) and

“sainthood of the sincere” (walå yat al-ßidd • q• n). “The first element of these

pairs consists of working for God with pure intention, having complete confi-

dence in him and the retribution He has promised. As for the second, the higher

level, it occurs by the extinction in man of his ego from the world, and his sub-

sistence uniquely in God.”72 Further, he notes, “The two modes of sainthood

previously evoked may also be described as “sainthood of elucidation” (walå ya

dal• l wa burhå n) and “sainthood of witnessing” (walå ya shuh¥d wa > iyå n). The

first is that of men of reason, while the second belongs to those of true vision.”73

Concerning this two-tiered model of sanctity, it is clear that the early

Shådhil• thinkers had developed a more nuanced and complex doctrine than




had existed in earlier sources. Even the prolific Ibn >Arab•, a contemporary of

al-Shådhil•, does not seem to have elaborated on the concept in this way. Cer-

tainly Ibn >Arab•, and Tirmidh• before him, distinguished between those whoare chosen by God and those who approach Him by their own efforts. But for

Ibn >Arab• it seems that sanctity has no function as a kind of ladder against

which the progress of the soul may be measured.74 From our discussions in the

previous chapter, it is clear that for Ibn >Arab• walå ya does not contain within

it stages through which the improving soul passes. The reason for this new

elaboration on walå ya within the Shådhiliyya is not completely clear, but per-

haps it is the context of the sufi order that played a role.75 Perhaps the impor-

tance of teaching disciples—in distinction to an emphasis on philosophical

speculation—presented the occasion for such a model of walå ya.76

In his > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq, Ibn Båkhilå also discusses the two-tiered model

of sanctity. He writes: “There are two groups of saints: the servant who speaks

from the treasury of his heart, and the servant who speaks from the treasury of

his unseen (ghaybihi). He who speaks from the treasury of his heart is

restricted (ma˙ß¥r ), while he who speaks from the treasury of his unseen is not

restricted.”77 Ibn Båkhilå also describes three modes of knowing reality. “The

first mode belongs to those who have little vision, and who use interpretation

(i> tibå r ). The second mode belongs to those who see by the manifestation of lights (bi-tajall• al-anwå r ); while the third belongs to those who see by the

extinction of the signs (å thå r ) of creation.”78 Although not named in this pas-

sage, it would seem that those who use interpretation would be the doctors of

dogmatic religion, while those who see by the lights are those of lesser saint-

hood, and those who transcend the signs of creation, as we saw earlier from

Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•, are the people of greater sainthood. The point here

is that although Ibn Båkhilå does not use the terms walå ya ßughra or kubr å , his

doctrine of walå ya is in fact two-tiered.Ibn Båkhilå describes another dual form of walå ya. This is best seen as a

model that contains a God-centred walå ya and a human-centred walå ya.

Walå ya is of two kinds: It is active as subject ( f å> il) . . . or as object

(maf >¥l) . . . If it functions as subject, then God takes charge of

(tawallå ) His servant and sets him in the way of obedience, shelters

him from disobedience, and bestows upon him gnosis, all of this by

His guidance. If it is active as object, then the servant turns towards

God and is granted obedience or His command [in the case of mes-sengers], and the avoidance of divine proscriptions, while being occu-

pied with service to Him.79

Thus, the first form of walå ya describes God’s upholding of humanity, and

the second, humanity’s best response. This depiction may be understood as




presenting walå ya as a two-sided coin, with divine guidance on the one hand,

and human service on the other. This understanding is quite natural in light of

the alternating meaning of the term wal• (pl. awliyå ), or saint, derived from thesame root as walå ya, that is WLY. In fact the word wal• is found in the Qur’an

referring both to God, as guardian, and to His saints. For example, in 7:196 we

read “My protector is Allåh (wal• -ya), who sent down the Book,” and in 10:62

“Truly, the saints (awliyå ) will have no fear, nor shall they grieve.”

Sanctity and Prophecy

An essential dimension of the concept of walå ya as developed in the Shåd-

hiliyya tradition was that of the extension, in one form or another, of the role of

prophecy (nubuwwa) into walå ya. In the doctrine of Ibn >Arab•, as inherited

from Tirmidh•, sanctity exists not only in the saints but also in the prophets. In

effect, walå ya encompasses prophecy and messengerhood. Yet, at the same

time, the saints as individuals are the inheritors of certain prophets, and this

heritage (wir å tha) provides a spiritual model for the saints.80 It appears that

this expansion of walå ya was not taken up by the earliest Shådhil• shaykhs.

Although it is clear that they had read Tirmidh•’s Khatm al-awliyå ’ and knewsomething of Ibn >Arab•,81 their concept of sainthood did not take up the exten-

sion of walå ya upward into the realm of prophecy; it did not take up the idea of

nubuwwa >å mma.82 The distinction between sanctity and prophecy was more

clearly preserved, seeking simply to extend the function of prophecy down-

ward into the realm of sainthood.

However, the Shådhilite tradition did follow Tirmidh• and Ibn >Arab• in

the recognition of saints as the inheritors of the prophets. According to Tir-

midh•, the saint’s inheritance may consist of a share of prophecy. This sharedictates his position in the hierarchy of saints.

There are ranks amongst persons drawn unto God (majdh¥b¥n) and

those who hear supernatural speech (mu˙addath¥n). Some of them

have been given a third of prophethood, while others have been given

a half and others still have been given more. But the most highly

endowed in this respect is the one who possesses the seal of [saint-

hood] (khatm al-walå ya) with God.83

As noted above, in the Akbarian system the forms walå ya takes in individual

saints is determined by prophetic heritage (wir å tha). This dynamic is certainly

present in the early Shådhiliyya, but there is little elaboration. For example, in

a passage intended to refute those who would deny the miracles of the saints,

Ibn >A†å’Allåh argues that these miracles are linked to powers beyond the saints




themselves. More precisely, these miracles are possible only because of the

saint’s association with a prophet.

Perhaps the reason for denying miracles (kar å ma) is the begrudging

of them the one to whom they have come. In fact, when miracles

appear through (a saint), they are simply witness to the sincerity of

the path of him he follows (matb¥> ihi). They are a kar å ma when they

occur to a saint; and they are a mu> jiza (prophetic evidentiary miracle)

when they occur to him [whom the saint] follows (mut å ba> atihi).

Thus they say, every kar å ma for a saint is a mu> jiza for the prophet

that the saint follows. So do not watch the follower, rather look at the

might of his leader.84

Although the term wir å tha is not used here, it is clear that it is the basic con-

cept being described. It is interesting to note that this model of inheritance

places the prophets squarely between the saints and God—in contrast to the

principle that sainthood is based on an ultimate proximity to the divine.

In other passages the idea of prophetic heritage may be presented generally

or quite specifically. Al-Shådhil• himself makes the general statement, “Even

though the ranks of the prophets and messengers are illustrious, [the saints]have a share (naß• b) in them, since there is no prophet or messenger who does

not have an heir (wå rith) from this community. Every heir has a rank according

to his inheritance from his legate.”85 Although his theory of prophetic inheri-

tance is not well developed, al-Shådhil• did add a second tier to wir å tha. He

states, “Among the [saints] there are a number who exclusively enjoy the

endowment (må dda) from the Prophet of God, which they witness as the

essence of certainty—but this number is small. And yet those of verification

(ta˙q• q) are many. Every prophet and saint has some endowment from theProphet.”86 The last line is particularly significant. It sets up a second level of

inheritance, namely, from the prophets upward to Mu˙ammad. In the wir å tha

model presented by Ibn >Arab• the ˙aq• qa mu˙ammadiyya would be put into

service here as the overarching entity from which all prophetic heritage is

inherited. For al-Shådhil• himself this seems to be the case also, but again,

elaboration is lacking.

In the Durrat al-asr å r , al-Shådhil• is recorded as saying that the saints are

the substitutes (abd å l) for the messengers (rusul) and the prophets (anbiyå ’);

naturally those who are the substitutes for Mu˙ammad are the elite. He says,

The saints are divided into two categories. One of them substitutes for

the [messengers], and the other substitutes for the prophets. The substi-

tutes of the prophets are the righteous ones (al-ßå li˙¥n) and the sub-

stitutes of the messengers are the sincere (al-ßidd • q¥n). The difference




between the righteous ones and the sincere is like the difference between

the prophets and messengers. There are some of one, and some of the

other—except that, among them, there are a number who exclusivelyenjoy the endowment from the [Messenger] of God.87

The term abd å l is used here in the early Shådhiliyya not as a part of a set hierar-

chy, but rather as a more general saintly category. In the preceding passage no

clear priority is given to either the substitutes of the prophets or the substitutes

of the messengers. However, elsewhere we are told that the substitutes of the

messengers are the elite, while the common are the substitutes of the prophets.88

Yet the following seems to suggest that the substitutes of the prophets constitute

the highest position possible. “This is the path of ascent to the presence of the

Most High, Most Lofty. This is the path of the beloved, substitutes of the

prophets (abd å l al-anbiyå ’), and of what is accorded any one of them beyond

this, no person can describe a single particle.”89 In light of the lack of any fur-

ther discussion of abd å l in the sources, it is safe to say that these discussions

suggest the early Shådhiliyya did not follow the fixed hierarchical model estab-

lished by Ibn >Arab•.

This extension of prophecy toward the saints may be found also in Ibn

>A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•. He states, “[K]now that the lights appearing from thesaints of God are from the emanation of the lights of prophethood upon them.”

Ibn >A†å’Allåh develops this idea further, identifying the content of this irradi-

ation (anwå r) as being the Mu˙ammadan Reality. He continues, “So the

Mu˙ammadan Reality (al-˙aq• qa al-mu˙ammadiyya) resembles the sun, and

the hearts of the saints are like moons.”90 Elsewhere he links the prophets to

the saints by stating that “the graces received by the saints are from the

Mu˙ammadan Reality; and the saints are the lights of prophethood, and the

dawning of their illuminations. . . . The manifestations of the lights of saint-hood are permanent due to the permanence of the lights of prophethood.”91 Of

course this does not mean that the saints have wholly taken up the prophetic

function. Rather, they remain in their realm as saints, but their function is to

hold the place of the Prophet once he has left his earthly community. We read,

“The Prophet calls [us] to God by the insight (baß• ra) of his function as perfect

messenger. And the saints call [us to God] according to their insights, either by

Polehood (qu† bå niyya), sincerity (ßidd • qiyya), or sainthood (walå ya ).”92

As mentioned in the previous chapter, Gerald Elmore has suggested that

the debate that arose in the third/ninth century over the issue of the superiority

of the saint over the prophet (Dfk©H ÒH D©m©H Gdqt∆) was a central point of contention

between sufism and its critics. He mentions statements from early figures such as

Ab¥ Yaz•d Bas†åm• that seem to take the saints as superior to the prophets; for

example, “We plunged into a sea, while the prophets remained on the shore.”93

Elmore goes on to show how Ibn >Arab• tried to rationalize these kinds of




statements in order to preserve the theologically necessary superiority of the

prophets. A generation later, N¥r al-D•n Isfaråyin• (d. 717/1317), in the same

conservative spirit, reconciled the following two statements: “The end of thesaints is the beginning point of the prophets” and “The end of the prophets is

the starting point of the saints.” The first sentence is taken to refer to the mysti-

cal path, thus the implication being that the most elite stage of sainthood ends

at the point prophethood begins. The second proposition, having come from

Sa>d al-D•n al-Óamm¥’• (d. 649/1252),94 Isfaråyin• takes as refering to sharia,

that is, that the prophets have finished bringing the divine law, and the task of

guiding the community has then been left to the saints.95 Al-Shådhil• does not

address this topic directly, but he does seem to place the elite of the saints

above the prophets in one statement. We must note first who this elite is. We

are told, “To realize perfection in their [the sufis’] state is difficult except for

the saint at the end of his state ( f • nihå ya ˙å lihi), or the sincere (ßidd • q) at the

beginning (of his state); because the end (ghå yå t ) of the saints is the starting

point (bid å yå t ) of the sincere.”96 This sincere one is thus to be understood as a

spiritual elite, in contrast to the general category of saints. 97 In the following

passage this elite seems to be one person who takes up God’s decree after the

prophets and messengers:

The prophets, messengers and poles all held closely to [God’s decree],

witnessing only God and His decree. They made clear statements,

explicated, commented and prescribed religious laws to those beneath

them in rank, until the command of God should come to the sincere

one (ßidd • q), chosen for Himself, whom He willed for the purpose of

revealing this science . . . and the science of the spirit, the science of

love, and the science of the intermediate state (barzakh) before the

beginning of existence (wuj¥d ).98

From this statement it seems that al-Shådhil• is not only echoing the idea that

“[t]he end of the prophets is the starting point of the saints,” probably in the

sense of sharia, mentioned above, but his ßidd • q is also an allusion to the Seal

of saints. This sincere one, in light of his role, is the fulfillment of the religious

sciences established by the prophets and propagated by the poles.

In Ibn Båkhilå’s thought the extension of prophecy to include sanctity is

also well represented. Although he maintains a clear distinction between the

levels of sainthood and prophecy, the essence of the divine, as it moves into

both realms, is one. First, Ibn Båkhilå approaches from the perspective of the

simple believer. He writes, “By the light of prophethoods (nubuwwå t ) faith is

strong, and you accept religious practices (a> må l). By the light of the saint-

hoods (walå yå t ) you remember the acts of devotion, and you complete the

states by following and emulation, and wanting to follow the rays of the greater




light by way of the lesser light.”99 Thus, the believer follows both the lower

saints and the higher prophets. The first category leads to the second. In com-

paring the natures of these two groups, Ibn Båkhilå places them at a distancefrom each other, stressing their differences.

The realities of the prophets are established in the realm of the unseen

(ghayb), and in their real essences (bi-dhawå tihim al-˙aq• qiyya) they

are there. They have tenuities (raqå ’iq) to the world of witnessing . . .

and the apparent realms. The saints are in the world of witnessing, but

they have tenuities to the unseen. The prophets penetrated the veil

[which separates the two domains] with their realities, while the saints

penetrated the veil by their tenuitites.100

Elsewhere Ibn Båkhilå explains that the saints, like the prophets, receive

divine communications that they are to pass on to the believers. As in the

above quotations, he is here distinguishing between the two groups. However,

he will follow this with an explanation that does away with any differences in

the essence of these communications. He writes, “The true path (al-† ar • q al-

˙aq• q• ) for creation on earth is to reach God. The door open to them [on earth]

leads to gnosis (ma> rifa) of God. The reason for this knowledge (> ilm) of Godis simply two things: the revelation (wa y) to the prophets, and the inspiration

(> ilm ilhå m• ) to the saints.”101 Ibn Båkhilå goes on, however, to say that the

essences of these two modes of divine communication are one. We read,

When the exalted [divine] unveiling (kashf ) descends to the first

level, it appears in the clearest form of its self-disclosure (tajall• ) to

those it touches. This is the original knowledge (> ilm aßl• ) and the uni-

versal light (n¥r kull• ). These belong to the prophets. If it descendsfrom here, and is then attained, this is inspirational knowledge (> ilm

ilhå m• ) and the opening light, which is certainty to the greatest of the

servants, and the saints.102

Thus a divine Self-disclosure passes through consecutive stages—being first

accessible to prophets, and then to saints and elite believers. A prophet’s

knowledge of the divine is different from that of the saint, due to them being

at different levels, yet this knowledge is at the same time of a single essence.

The prophets and the saints do not offer the believer parallel communications,

they offer the same knowledge, but from different perspectives, and one after

the other.103

As mentioned above, Ibn Båkhilå’s al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya takes up the

question of saints and prophets. The primary concern of its commentary on

Ó izb al-ba˙r is to explain how the “inspired” prayer of a saint can contain quo-




tations from the revelation (Qur’an) to a prophet. The question is not just, Is it

appropriate to quote and paraphrase the Qur’an? but also, How can the saint

(and his common followers) petition for what should be reserved for prophetsonly? Ibn Båkhilå’s answers to these questions shine an indirect light on his

notion of walå ya. In his comments on al-Shådhil•’s petition, “nas’aluka al-

> ißma” (we ask you for protection / inerrancy), he notes that > ißma, as generally

understood, is restricted to prophets, who are protected from committing grave

sins. He reconciles this doctrine with the saint’s petition by saying, “He [al-

Shådhil•] did not ask to be preserved from disobedience (ma>ßiyya), nor from

doubt or uncertainty or delusion completely—for inerrancy (> ißma) is particu-

lar to the prophets . . . [Rather] he asked for > ißma from the kind [of doubts and

delusion] that blocks the heart from faith in the unseen.”104 Elsewhere Ibn

Båkhilå repeats this idea more clearly, pointing out that (not unlike nubuwwa

and ilhå m sharing a common essence) > ißma takes form according to its loca-

tion. He writes, “The prophets have an > ißma specific to them, and the saints

have theirs, likewise the pious and the [common] believers—all according to

their state (˙å l).”105 Further, > ißma may be attained by those other than prophets

and messengers, according to what is proper for their spiritual level.106

The operative distinction here is “according to their level.” For Ibn

Båkhilå this also allows him to account for other apparent paradoxes. On theissue of how both the common believer and the saint—and a prophet for that

matter—may make the identical supplication, for example for forgiveness, in

Ó izb al-ba˙r , Ibn Båkhilå points out that since the petitioners are at different

spiritual levels, the meaning of their petitions is different. He writes,

But what are the devotions (> ibå d å t ) of the messengers compared to

those of the prophets? What are the devotions of the prophets com-

pared to those of the saints? and those of the saints compared to thoseof the pious, etc., to the last level of believer? It is inconceivable that

the realities [of these devotions] differ in themselves, rather, [the case

must be that] they differ according to the state of him to whom they

appear . . . Both the master of the exalted spiritual level (maqå m), and

he who is lower, ask with one word, one reality, yet [the realities] dif-

fer due to the difference of [the petitioners’] levels. The prophets ask

for forgiveness, and most [common] servants do likewise, but how

different their requests are! The pardon requested by the prophets is

different from that requested by others. The difference is not to be

found in the reality of forgiveness itself, but rather in the understand-

ing (i> tibå r ) of its location (ma˙all).107

Ibn Båkhilå applies the same argument to the meaning of the phrase “[Lord,]

subjugate to us this sea as You subjugated the sea to Moses.” He remarks that




this should not necessarily be taken as a request to God each time to part the

seas, rather it should be understood as a petition for the miracle of God’s

omnipotence working good in our lives—establishing in us righteousness, god-liness, wisdom. He says, “Know that the appearance of omnipotence (qudra) is

sometimes by grace and [dramatic] miracle and the breaking of the anticipated

norms; or it is by the miracle of fixing norms and engendering wisdom . . . The

second kind [of miracle] is for the generality of creation, while the first kind is

only for the elite of the prophets and the saints.”108 Thus, Ibn Båkhilå’s discus-

sions in al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya—reflecting his earlier discussions of walå ya—

move to blur the barriers between the prophets and the saints (not unlike the

effort to defend the blurry lines between the Qur’an and the ˙izb). This is done

by extension to the saints of attributes previously reserved for the prophets.

The same blurring of lines occurs in Ibn Båkhilå’s resolution of the apparent

paradox of a prophet asking for forgiveness, like any other simple believer; or

a common believer asking for the same divine favor for which a saint or a

prophet might petition.

We see that for Ibn Båkhilå the concept of walå ya is rather complex. His

master, Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar•, had laid out the two-tiered model, that of greater and lesser sanctity. Ibn Båkhilå took this up and expanded upon it. We

noted that this model was not that followed by Ibn >Arab•. It seems that for Ibn

Båkhilå and the Shådhilite tradition, one of the dimensions of walå ya may be

found—at least potentially—in every believer. This lower dimension also func-

tions as a stepping-stone for the soul along a path to higher degrees of sanctity.

It was also pointed out that Ibn Båkhilå’s doctrine of walå ya, in the Shåd-

hilite tradition, sought to expand the realm of prophecy and messengerhood to

intersect with sanctity. While recognizing that saints and prophets receiveknowledge of, and from, the divine in different ways (one by inspiration, the

other by revelation), the essence of this divine informing (tajall• ) is the same in

both instances. In the more theologically driven work, al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya,

the discussion of inerrancy (> ißma) is based on the same understanding, which

is that the nature of understanding and communication with God is relative to

one’s spiritual level. Like walå ya taking on different forms at different levels,

the same petitions of God may be used by prophets, saints, and even the com-

mon believer.

Before moving on to our discussion of the Waf å’iyya, a few words should

be said concerning the doctrine of walå ya as we have encountered it so far.

These comments will also serve us later in chapters 5 and 6, when we discuss

the Waf å’iyya contribution to the concept of walå ya. We have seen that for the

early Shådhiliyya the idea of proximity to the divine (qurba) is a primary ele-

ment. We also noted the development of a two-tiered model, which in shorthand




we may describe as the distinction between a greater and a lesser sainthood. It

was noted that these two tiers present a gradation of walå ya; that is, a sanctity

that increases in quality as the individual ascends the levels. This model placeswalå ya in the sphere of spiritual discipline, that is, the way followed by an

individual seeker. From its earliest formulations, sufi theory has always con-

ceived of spiritual discipline as a path († ar • qa) consisting of spiritual levels

(maqå må t ) to be attained. It appears that at least part of the doctrine of sanctity

held by the early Shådhiliyya saw walå ya as one of these paths. It is also worth

noting that this model is certainly closer to Tirmidh•’s system of distinguish-

ing between two types of saints than it is to Ibn >Arab•’s elaborate typologies

of saints.

We also noted the difference between what we called Ibn >Arab•’s “infla-

tion” of walå ya upward, and the early Shådhiliyya’s extending of prophetic

function downward. This is the contrast between the emphasis on the eternal

nature of walå ya in Ibn >Arab• and the understanding in the early Shådhiliyya

that sainthood was essentially the extension of the prophetic role—beyond the

lifetime of the Prophet—into the mundane world through the saints. This latter

position again is much more in accord with Tirmidh•’s system than it is with

that of Ibn >Arab•.

The early Shådhiliyya did not follow Ibn >Arab• in his universalizing of walå ya or the figure of Mu˙ammad (although Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar•

does briefly mention the concept). Nor did the early Shådhiliyya take up Ibn

>Arab•’s elaborations on the role of the Seal. This idea was known to them at

least through Tirmidh•’s works, but they appear to have steered away from it.

The objection may be raised here that Ibn >Arab•’s concept of nubuwwa >å mma

would have to be considered an extension of the prophetic function. Yet for our

purposes of comparison, the point being made is that, despite the terminology

involved, for Ibn >Arab•, walå ya has a much inflated role in comparison to itsunderstanding among the Shådhiliyya, for whom walå ya is more like a counter

balance or completion of prophecy.




Arriving from the Maghreb

Before moving to discuss the writings of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ we shouldfirst take up the essential outline of their lives and the wider context in which

they lived. The Waf å’iyya is certainly an Egyptian order, but its origins are to

be found within the currents of a much wider tide of migration from the

Maghreb. Movement from Arabia across North Africa has a long history. The

arrival of Idr•s ibn >Abd Allåh from Arabia in 172/788 ultimately led to the

founding of Fez and the Idr•sid dynasty, which was to last into the fourth/tenth

century.1 Moving in the other direction, from west to east, the Fatimid Caliph

al-Mu>izz, in the latter half of the fourth/tenth century, would extend the nas-cent Fatimid empire from Tunisia into Egypt.2 The tide was again reversed in

the fifth/eleventh century with the demographically significant migration of

the Ban¥ Óilål Arab tribes from the Óijåz into the Maghreb. Although nowhere

near a movement on the same scale, we saw earlier that al-Shådhil•, and a

number of his followers, were part of the steady trickle of scholars and mer-

chants from Morocco and Tunisia in the seventh/thirteenth century. Moving to

Alexandria at the beginning of what was to be a long period of prosperity

under the Mamluks, al-Shådhil•’s order was to enjoy great success in Egypt and

was thus positioned to expand into the Levant and the eastern lands of theIslamic world. Al-Shådhil• died in 656/1258, but of course Maghrebis contin-

ued to arrive in Egypt most simply on the way to Arabia, but many to seek a

new life in the growing cities of Alexandria and Cairo. Following the same road,

and at roughly the same time as al-Shådhil•, was the grandfather of Mu˙ammad

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad al-Najm of Tunis. Before jumping into geneologies and

Chapter 3

The Waf å’iyya in Time and Space



geography, however, let us read a traditional general narrative of Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ and his roots. This account will serve us later as a jumping-off point to

further details.Mu˙ammad Waf å’, the founder of the Waf å’iyya:

He was born in Alexandria in 702/1301. His speech concerning

the mystical sciences was peculiar (F∂n¥). He wrote many works,

among them Kit å b al-> ur ¥s, Kit å b al-sha>å ’ir and a great d • wå n of

poetry.3 It is said that he is named Waf å’ because one day the Nile

stopped its yearly rise, falling short of its completion (al-waf å ’).4 The

people of Cairo were resolved to flee the land [in anticipation of

famine], when Mu˙ammad Waf å’ appeared at the river’s edge and

said, “By the grace of God, Rise!” The river then rose and the water

reached its proper level.

He travelled in the Way of Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•, under the

guidance of Då’¥d ibn Måkhilå. He went to Akhm•m [near Suhå j],

marrying there and establishing a large zå wiya. People flocked to visit

him. He then moved to Cairo, taking up residence on the island of al-

R¥∂a. There, engaging in devotions and busying himself with the

remembrance of God, his fame spread to the most distant corners.He died in Cairo, on the 11th of Rab•> al-Awwal, in the year

765/1363, and is burried in the Qaråfa cemetery between the [sufi

shaykhs] Ab¥ al-Sa>¥d ibn Ab• al->Ashå’ir and Tå j al-D•n ibn >A†å’

Allåh al-Iskandar•, according to his wish before dying: “Burry me

between Sa>d and >A†å’.”5

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ was Maghrebi in origin, his grandfather Mu-

˙ammad al-Najm having arrived at Alexandria. He [al-Najm] was the

master of splendid mystical states, and clear miracles. He joined withthe pole Ibråh•m al-Das¥q•, and they both drew on [the teachings of]

his master.6 Al-Najm’s place of birth was Tunis, and his family are

from there and the area of Sfax.7 He settled in Alexandria, where he

was blessed with a son, Mu˙ammad al-Awsa†, the father of Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’.

Mu˙ammad al-Awsa† was famous for his sanctity, being among

the companions of knowledge and excellence. He died young, being

burried in their zå wiya in Alexandria, known as the Najmiyya, beside

his father.When Mu˙ammad Waf å’ died, he left two sons, >Al• Waf å’ and

Shihåb al-D•n A˙mad Waf å’. They were young at the time, and so

were raised under the tutelage of Mu˙ammad al-Zayla>•. When >Al•

reached the age of seventeen, he took his father’s place, holding [sufi]




gatherings. His dhikr spread throughout the land, and his followers

multiplied.

For the most part he resided on the island of al-R¥∂a. He com-posed supplications, prayers, admonitions, poetry and other works.

His death was at home, on Tuesday the second of Dh¥ al-Óijja, in the

year 807/1405. By way of sons he had Ab¥ al->Abbås A˙mad, Ab¥ al-

Tayyib, Ab¥ al-Tåhir and Ab¥ al-Qåsim.8

Halfway through this account, mention is made of Mu˙ammad al-Najm. In

spite of his being described here as having “splendid mystical states, and clear

miracles,” there seems to be no mention of him, either in the Egyptian or

Tunisian sources, beyond his position in the Waf å’ geneology. In fact, the fam-

ily’s descent is rather unremarkable until it is traced back to the second/eighth

century. At this point >Alid credentials are established through Idr•s ibn >Abd

Allåh ibn Óasan ibn >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib, the founder of the Idr•sid state in

Morocco.9 Although this family was clearly >Alid by blood, it cannot be said to

have been Sh•>• in any overt way. The Idr•sids ruled far from the struggles tak-

ing place in the Islamic heartland seeking to restore the house of the Prophet to

the caliphate, and at a period before the development of Sh•>ism as a distinct

doctrinal system. Idr•s himself died during the lifetime of the seventh Sh•>•Imåm, M¥så al-KåΩim (d.183/799).10 Although the Idr•sids were not Sh•>ite,

this does not mean that the family that came to be known as the Waf å’ did not

proudly identify themselves as descendants of the Ahl al-Bayt, that is, people

of the Prophet’s family. As we shall see below, this has remained an important

part of their social standing.

This pedigree claimed by the Waf å’ family is quite distinct, however, from

the spiritual ancestors it claims in its silsila (chain of transmission) of esoteric

science. Sources for the Waf å’iyya order reproduce a line of esoteric initiationthat goes back through various sufi figures and Imåms to Óusayn ibn >Al•. The

line first runs through the Shaykhs of the early Shådhiliyya: Då’¥d ibn Båkhilå(733/1332), Ibn >A†å’ Allåh Iskandar• (709/1309), al-Murs• (686/1287), al-

Shådhil• (658/1258), Ibn Mash•sh (622/1225) . . . al-Junayd (297/909), al-Sar•al-Saqa†• (cir. 253/867), Ma>r¥f al-Karkh• (200/815), >Al• al-Ri∂å (203/818,

eighth Sh•>• Imåm), M¥så al-KåΩim (183/799, seventh Imåm), Ja>far al-Íådiq

(148/765, sixth Imåm), Mu˙ammad Båqir (117/735 or 122/740, fifth Imåm),

Zayn al->Åbid•n (94/712 fourth Imåm), Imåm al-Óusayn (61/681 third Imåm),

>Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib (40/661).11 The silsila represents a claim to a tradition of

mystical knowledge, but here, as is usually the case in the Islamic mysticism,

there is no tangible conncection between those at one end of the chain and

those at the other. In other words, the tar • qa Waf å’iyya has not actually inher-

ited teachings, texts, or practices from Sh•>• Imåms. As we saw in the previous

The Waf å ’iyya in Time and Space 51



chapter, the early Shådhiliyya cannot be said to hold any ideas of spiritual

authority that directly reflect the Sh•>• doctrine of the Imåms. Later on, when

we explore >Al• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’s teachings on walå ya, beyond certain

shared terminology and veneration of >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib, it will become clear

that they do not reflect a Sh•>• theology.12

In the hagiographical passage quoted above, mention is made of the origin

of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s laqab or honorific, Waf å’. This title has served as the

family name down to the modern era—often appearing as Ibn Waf å’ (e.g., >Al•ibn Waf å’). However, this laqab was not unknown before Mu˙ammad adopted

it in the eighth/fourteenth century. The name Ab¥ al-Waf å’ was used by three

tribes: the Óijåz• tribe descended from Ab¥ al-Waf å’ A˙mad ibn Sulayman,

parts of the Tam•m tribe of the Óijåz, and one tribe from Iraq.13 Of the latter

tribe, the famous saint Ab¥ al-Waf å’ Tå j al->Årif •n (d. 501/1107) had been a

teacher of >Abd al-Qådir al-J•lån• (d. 561/1166) in Iraq.14 Some of the families

derived from Tå j al->Årif •n, known as Waf å’iyya, traveled to Egypt and the

Levant at various points in time.15 One family was that of Ab¥ al-Waf å’ Tå j al-

D•n Mu˙ammad (d. 803/1401), which settled in Jerusalem in 782/1380. His

great-great grandfather, Badr al-D•n Mu˙ammad (d. 650/1253), had originally

moved from Iraq to Palestine. Tå j al-D•n Mu˙ammad brought what was to

become known as the “ zå wiya of the Ab¥ al-Waf å family,” across from thewestern edge of the Óaråm enclosure.16 His descendants were the shaykhs of

the Waf å’iyya order in Jerusalem.17 This family is not related to the Waf å’s of

Egypt, nor does their Waf å’iyya order appear to have any connection to the the

Waf å’iyya of Cairo.18 Another well-known descendant of Tå j al-D•n Mu˙am-

mad was Ab¥ Bakr al-Waf å’• (d. 991/1583), who lived in Damascus and Aleppo

and about whom more than one hagiography was written.19 However, the

“Waf å’iyya” of Syria (a branch of the Shådhiliyya) existed from the mideigh-

teenth century through to about 1950. Its founder was another Ab¥ al-Waf å’,who died in 1140/1727.20

In the passage quoted above, we heard the miracle of Mu˙ammad’s com-

manding the Nile to rise. Not surprisingly, however, this is not the only report of

signs of his sanctity. In the hagiography composed by Ab¥ al-La†å’if,21 an

account is related in which the head of the Shådhiliyya order in Egypt, Ibn >A†å’

Allåh al-Iskandar•, visits the infant Mu˙ammad Waf å’. In view of Ibn >A†å’

Allåh’s death date, this encounter would have been possible, since Mu˙ammad

was seven years old at the shaykh’s death. Ab¥ al-La†å’if tells us, “When

Sayyid• al-Kab•r [Mu˙ammad Waf å’] was born, Tå j al-D•n ibn >A†å’Allåh camewith a number of companions to his home in order to visit him. When he saw

the swaddling baby he kissed him, saying to his friends, ‘This one has come

[into the world] with the science of our [spiritual] realities.’”22 Apparently

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ was more than precocious as child. It is said that he com-

posed his many books on the sufi Way before reaching the age of ten.23




The spiritual link between Mu˙ammad Waf å’ and his son >Al• is also a sig-

nificant concern in the hagiography. Although >Al• was only six years old when

his father died, he describes him as a storehouse of mystical knowledge fromwhich he continues to draw.24 On the authority of >Al•’s nephew, it is related

that on his deathbed Mu˙ammad took the form of >Al•, saying, “My vision is

his vision.”25 Elsewhere the story is told of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ passing down

his gift for mystical poetry to his son >Al•. Sha>rån• tells us,

When [Mu˙ammad’s] death neared, he conferred his belt (min† aqa)

upon al-Abzår•, the composer of muwashshahå† poems, saying, “This

is placed with you in trust until you confer it upon my son >Al•.”

While he had the belt he composed elegant muwashshahå† . Once >Al•

grew up, and he conferred it upon him, he returned to his previous

condition of not being able to compose muwashshahå† .26

Although >Al• Waf å was his father’s second son, Shihåb al-D•n being the first,

there is no question as to his superior status. As we shall see in the following

chapters, >Al• was a mystical writer and of great ability. His older brother,

however, clearly made no such contribution. Nevertheless, the older Shihåb

al-D•n did direct the Waf å’iyya order for seven years after the death of hisyounger brother.

There does appear in this hagiographical tradition a need to demonstrate

the superiority of the Waf å’s over their spiritual forefathers. As we saw above,

Mu˙ammad’s superiority is recognized by Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar•. The

claim is also made by Mu˙ammad himself that although he was schooled in the

mystical sciences by Ibn >A†å’Allåh’s student, Då’¥d ibn Båkhilå, he has since

eclipsed that tradition and set out on his own Way. He says, “We were directed

(Fsjk˚) first by Då’¥d, but now this connection with him is broken, as it is withall others.”27 >Al• Waf å’ later contributes to the superior image of the Waf å’iyya.

As we read earlier, an associate of >Al•’s great-grandfather, Mu˙ammad al-

Najm, was Ibråh•m al-Das¥q•. This great Egyptian saint founded a popular sufi

order, the Burhåniyya. It was probably the success of this order that led >Al• to

consider this saint another figure to be spiritually surpassed. Ab¥ al-La†å’if

tells the story of >Al• traveling to the grave of al-Das¥q•, only to be ignored by

its living occupant. In response to this snub, >Al• begins reciting “Allåh,

Allåh,” at which point all the plants on earth join him in recitation.28 This con-

cern with surpassing one’s predecessors is not without precedent. Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil• himself, when asked about his spiritual masters, said that at

one point he had been directed (Fsj˚HJk… ) by >Abd al-Salåm ibn Mash•sh, but

now he swims in the five Adamic seas of the Prophet, Ab¥ Bakr, >Umar,

>Uthmån, and >Al•, and the five spiritual seas of Gabriel, Michael, >Azrå’•l,

Isråf •l and the Great Spirit ( nf…!H ∏Mn©H).29




Not surpisingly, in addition to their relations with other saints, Mu˙am-

mad and >Al• Waf å’ were able to get the best of all sorts of enemies. In the

hagiography, the cases range from a scheming vizier, to a doubting shaykh, toabusive Mamluke soldiers.30 It must be noted, however, that most of the mira-

cles attributed to Mu˙ammad and his son are rather more straighforward. Typi-

cally, an eastern holy man visits and has produced for him lemon from his

native land or a boy drowned in the Nile is brought back to life.31

The spiritual authority of the Waf å’iyya was certainly not based primarily

on their abilities to out-perform their rivals or to impress visitors. A more sub-

stantial portrait of sanctity is also offered in the hagiography. Less dramatic,

but more interesting for our study, are the statments that reflect an understanding

of sainthood itself. In one place Mu˙ammad Waf å’ makes the following claim:

“Every saint of God, from my time to the advent of the [final] Hour, draws

from me, either at his start or his end.” The passage (presumably Ab¥ al-

La†å’if speaking here) goes on to identify Mu˙ammad Waf å’ as the “Seal of

saints, as indicated by the author of the > Anqå mughrib.”32 Yet as we shall see

in the next chapter, where Mu˙ammad Waf å’s understanding of sanctity is

explored, statements of Sealhood will be based more precisely on Mu˙ammad’s

own interpretation of the Seal of saints. For example, we shall see that Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ claims for himself an office of Sealhood which, as distinct from thesystem of Ibn >Arab•, incorporates both general and Mu˙ammadan sainthood.

Waf å’ sanctity is also attested to through symbolic visions. The story is

told that in a dream >Al• once found himself traveling through the heavens.

There he found an elegant palace, around which were a number of open graves.

These sweet-smelling graves contained living occupants wrapped in white

shrouds. When >Al• asked them who they were, he was informed that they are

all the saints of their times and that their master is their Seal. They await this

Seal’s intercession. When >Al• Waf å’ finally reaches the door of the palace, heopens it only to find himself seated as the master of the palace.33

Beyond the claims to Sealhood, >Al• Waf å’s spiritual authority is based, in

the hagiography, upon his encounters with the Prophet Mu˙ammad. The first of

these occured when >Al• was a boy studying Qur’anic recitation. After a difficult

lesson, he describes the following vision: “Then, in a waking state, I saw the

Prophet. He was wearing a white cotton shirt, which suddenly appeared on me.

He then said to me, “Read!” so I read for him Surat al-Îu˙å (Q. 93).”34 The sim-

ilarity to the traditional account of the vision of Gabriel to the Prophet is striking.

There the angel brought to Mu˙ammad the first Revelation, saying, “Read!”35

>Al• Waf å’ goes on to relate a second vision, which occured near the grave of

his father in the Qaråfa cemetery. He says, “At the age of twenty-one, I was

praying the morning prayers at al-Qaråfa, when I saw the Prophet before me. He

embraced me, saying, ‘Truly, your Lord blesses you.’” >Al• goes on to say, “I

took [the function of] his tongue, from that time onwards.”36 This is a rather bold




claim, leaving no doubt as to the elite nature of >Al• Waf å’s sanctity. Even when

the Prophet appears to one of >Al•’s followers, it is to announce that >Al•’s special

spiritual status means that his supplications to God are never left unheeded.37

In addition to the hagiographical tradition, however, we do have one con-

temporary souce that takes a critical stand toward the Waf å’iyya. This is the

biographer and chronicler Ibn Óajar al->Asqalån• (d. 852/1449). In his entry on

>Al• Waf å’, he praises the subject’s personal qualities but objects to some of the

practices that take place at the Waf å’ dhikr . Ibn Óajar says that >Al• Waf å’ is

“vigilant, keen of mind and cultured,” but although “I met him, I reject his

companions gesturing in prostration towards him.” Also, while in the middle

of a samå> ceremony, he turned about saying, “Wherever you turn, there is the

Face of God” (Q. 2:115). Those present in the mosque cried out, “You have

blasphemed! You have blasphemed!” so he and his companions left.38 It would

thus appear that >Al• Waf å’ at times faced public censure for the excesses of his

prayer and the intense devotion he received from his followers. The biogra-

phers have left us no other firsthand accounts of >Al• Waf å’, so there is no way

to verify Ibn Óajar’s observations. Nevertheless, the limited details that have

come down to us concerning the Waf å’ home on the island of al-R¥∂a appear,

at least circumstantially, to corroborate Ibn Óajar’s portrait of a sufi Shaykh

challenging the boundaries of conventional ritual.It appears that >Al• withdrew the activities of the Waf å’iyya to the family

home on al-R¥∂a. This privacy no doubt allowed him, and subsequent khalifas

of the order, the freedom to pursue their spiritual practices. Ibn Óajar himself

describes a Waf å’ house which was self-sufficient. Apparently Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ set up a minbar in his home, from which he preached to his companions

and followers as part of the Friday prayers.39 This unusual observance of the

otherwise community-oriented Friday prayers is not pointed to approvingly.

That the Waf å’ home on al-R¥∂a was the center of the sufi order there is nodoubt. A ninth/fifteenth century figure, al-Zawåw•, provides us with an inde-

pendent account. He became an acquaintance of Ya˙ya ibn Waf å’ (d. 857/

1453), the fourth khalifa of the Waf å’iyya. Al-Zawåw• refers to the house on al-

R¥∂a as the “bayt al-dhikr ” (house of remembrance), and speaks of aspirants

entering cells there to practice khalwa (seclusion).40 Later sources tell us that

Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Ó izb al-fat was recited in the family bayt al-sajjå da each

week.41 The historical records, to my knowledge, have not left us any more

detailed accounts of the ritual-devotional practices of the early Waf å’iyya. Yet

we may understand that generally an aura of elitism and charismatic mysteryseem to have been nurtured. The later chronicler, al-Maqr•z•, notes that >Al•

Waf å’ and his brother, Shihåb al-D•n, received exagerated affections from their

followers. He also implies that this situation was encouraged by their habit of

only appearing in public for spiritual gatherings and in order to visit their

father’s grave.42




Among the Elite of Cairo

The creative energy of the first generations of Waf å’s was not sustained oncethe family became established in the capital. The concerns Mu˙ammad and

>Al• Waf å’ had regarding sanctity were not pursued by their progeny, and the

Waf å’iyya ceased to produce mystical literature beyond the occasional effort at

poetry.43 The Waf å’ family did prosper, however, but only in the way of social

prestige and wealth. As is the case so often with dynamic founders, their fol-

lowers tend to ride on their coattails of tradition and charisma.

The office of the khalifa, or the shaykh al-sajjå da of the Waf å’iyya order,

was held by the head of the family. Unlike the larger sufi orders, which usually

broke down into regional branches not long after the death of the founder,44 the

Waf å’iyya never spread beyond Cairo in any meaningful way.45 Not only was

this order limited to Cairo, but its spiritual leadership was derived exclusively

from within the family bloodline. The various biographical sources agree on

the line of shaykhs as follows:46

1. >Al• Waf å’ (d. 807/1405) [brother to the following]

2. Shihåb al-D•n A˙mad Ab¥ al->Abbås ibn Mu˙ammad Waf å’ (d. 814/1412)

[father to. . .]3. Ab¥ al-Fat˙ Mu˙ammad ibn Waf å’ (d. 852/1448) [brother to]

4. Ab¥ al-Siyådåt Ya˙ya ibn Waf å’ (d. 857/1453) [uncle to]

5. Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Marå˙im (d. 867/1462) [father to]

6. Mu˙ibb al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Fa∂l (d. 888/1483) [father to]

7. Burhån al-D•n Ibråh•m Ab¥ al-Mak årim (d. 908/1502) [father to]

8. Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Fa∂l al-Majdh¥b (d. 942/1536) [father

to]

9. Burhån al-D•n Ibråh•m Ab¥ al-Mak årim (d. 966/1558 or 968/1560) [fatherto]

10. Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Fa∂l (d. 1008/1599) [grandfather to no.

12] [uncle to]

11. Zayn al-D•n ibn >Abd al-Fattå˙ Ab¥ al-Ikråm (d. 1054/1644) [father to no.

13] [uncle to]

12. Sharaf al-D•n Ya˙ya Ab¥ al-Lu†f (d. 1067/1655) [cousin to]

13. Zayn al-D•n >Abd al-Wahhåb Ab¥ al-Takhß•ß (d. 1098/1687) [father to]

14. Jamål al-D•n Y¥suf Ab¥ al-Irshåd (d. 1113/1701) [grandfather to no. 19]

[brother to]

15. Sharaf al-D•n >Abd al-Khåliq Ab¥ al-Khayr (d. 1161/1748) [grandfather to

no. 18] [uncle to]

16. Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Ishråq (d. 1171/1758) [uncle to]

17. Majd al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Håd• (d. 1176/1762) [cousin to]

18. Shihåb al-D•n A˙mad Ab¥ al-Imdåd (d. 1182/1768) [cousin to]




19. Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Anwår (d. 1228/1813) [uncle to]

20. A˙mad Ab¥ al-Iqbål (d.?) [father to]

21. A˙mad Ab¥ al-Naßr (d. 1280/1864) [father to]22. A˙mad >Abd al-Khåliq Ab¥ al-Futu˙åt (d. 1324/1907).47

Not mentioned in this list of the shaykhs of the sajjå da Waf å’iyya is the

brother of Ab¥ al-Fat˙ (no. 3), >Abd al-Ra˙mån Ab¥ al-Fa∂l (d. 814/1412). He

is described by Ibn Óajar and al-Sakhåw• as a promising mystical thinker and

poet, but he died the same year as his father, having drowned in the Nile.48

Another important early figure was >Al• Waf å’s daughter, Óusnå’ (d. 888/1483).

She was certainly more accomplished them her two sisters and four brothers.

The biographer al-Sakhåw• tells us that she was the first director of the (Sultan)

°nål ribå† , located near the Waf å’iyya zå wiya in the >Abd al-Båsi† quarter.49 The

Waf å’ early on had established themselves among the civilian élite. The Sultan

Jaqmaq (d. 857/1453) was a companion and one-time student of Ab¥ al-Fat˙(no. 3), even appearing in one of the shaykh’s miracle stories.50

Generally, it may be said that most of the Waf å’ shaykhs were neither inno-

vative thinkers nor productive writers. Indicative of the conservative nature

taken on by the Waf å’ family is the record of their treatment of Ab¥ al-Mawåhib

ibn Zaghdån al-T¥nis• al-Shådhil• (d. 882/1477). Although Ab¥ al-Mawåhibwas a prolific and popular mystical writer of the Shådhil• tradition, the “sons

of Ab¥ al-Waf å’” seized him in their zå wiya and beat him. Bleeding from his

head, he declared submissively, “You are my masters, and I am your servant.”51

Despite Sha>rån•’s reverence for the founders Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’, and

his long association with Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Fa∂l al-Majdh¥b

(khalifa no. 8), he describes Ab¥ al-Mawåhib as the true inheritor of >Al•Waf å’s eloquence.

Sha>rån•

52

calls Ab¥ al-Fa∂l al-Majdh¥b the “Seal of the cycles” and attrib-utes miracles to him. However, the significance of the Waf å’iyya by this time

certainly lay in more worldly pursuits. Before discussing the history of the

Waf å’iyya among the religious elite of Cairo, let us finish with the silsila of the

order. The nineteenth khalifa, Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Anwår, claimed

to be the Seal of the saints of the Waf å’iyya.53 Although in fact he would be suc-

ceeded, his grandiose claim was not far off the mark. After his spectacular

career—as will be seen below—there would be only three more Waf å’ shaykhs.

When A˙mad >Abd al-Khåliq died in 1324/1906, his only surviving children

were daughters, one of whom had married >Abd al-Óam•d al-Bakr•, who theninherited the sajjå da of the Waf å’iyya. Being from the Bakr• family, this marked

the end of the Waf å’iyya family’s association with the order.54

As for the physical presence of the Waf å’iyya order and family, we heard

earlier of the movement from Tunis to Alexandria by Mu˙ammad al-Najm in

the early seventh/thirteenth century, and of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s successful




move to Akhm•m.55 The presence in Cairo was first established as a family

home on the island of al-R¥∂a, which as we also saw, doubled as a mosque-

zå wiya. At some point al-R¥∂a was abandoned; no trace of the site existstoday. Early on, the “zåwiya of the ribåt,” located in the >Abd al-Båsit quarter,

played a central role for the order. The building no longer survives. Al-Bakr•describes a ritual procession of each newly appointed khalifa out of the

zå wiyat al-ribå† .56 Close by, in the same quarter, was the Ribåt Zawjat °nål.

Also near by was the Sab•l al-Waf å’iyya, established in 846/1442, and associ-

ated with °nål.57 However, the most important site, the Great zå wiya, was

established in the southern Qaråfa cemetery, near the shrine of Ibn >A†å’Allåh

Iskandar•. The history of this complex is not clear either, at least before the

year 1191/1777. At a later date, but before the end of the twelfth/eighteenth

century, a large family home was built near the lagoon Birkat al-F•l.58 This

compound contained a large hall that was at times used for festivities.59

At the heart of the Great zå wiya are the graves of Mu˙ammad and >Al•Waf å’, covered by an elegant wooden dome. On the east side of the father and

son graves is a small pool (approximately 1 m2) which used to be filled with

red sand.60 It is not clear to me what this sand was used for. Surrounding this

are the graves of seventeen of their descendants from various eras.61 At some

point after the death of >Al• Waf å’, a structure was built some fifteen metersfrom the east side of the dome. This structure almost certainly functioned as a

zå wiya and later extended either as a roof over graves or as a wall around them.

(Traditionally, in the Qaråfa cemetery family plots are walled in, but the more

elaborate may have roofs.)62 Detailed records of this complex appear as of

1191/1777. Al-Jabart• tells us that in 1190 a.h., Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥al-Anwår ( khalifa no. 19) petitioned the representative of the Ottoman gover-

nor Mu˙ammad Pasha al->Izzat• for help in repairing the Waf å’s ancestral

zå wiya. Ab¥ al-Anwår was helped in this matter by the support of one Mu˙am-mad Murta∂å.63 In response to this request, the Porte ordered fifty purses to be

taken from his Egyptian treasury for the project—followed by an additional

sum later, to complete the task. Jarbart• describes the repairs, which were more

like rennovations, thus:

The walls were torn down and widened at the base, with the result

that the tombs and crypts in the foundations were destroyed. Then

walls were built and decorated with inscriptions, various kinds of

multi-colored marble, gold overlay, and marble pillars . . . Residencesand other chambers were built around the zå wiya, and the adjacent

palace where Shams al-D•n (Ab¥ al-Anwår) and his women used to

stay during the annual mawlid festivities was enlarged.64

The result was a zå wiya-mosque shrine, measuring approximately twenty-seven

metres by twenty-nine metres, built around the family burial plot. Included are




an impressive mi˙r å b and minbar . Doors in the mosque lead to a servant’s

quarters and to the quarters of the attendant responsible for lamp lighting. These

quarters are now in ruin. Two more doors lead to parts of the adjoining livingcomplex. (I have not been able to investigate this area.) Inscriptions above the

door mark the year 1191 AH as the date of the firmå n from Sultan >Abd al-

Óam•d for the construction.65

The Waf å’iyya observed a number of holidays (mawå sim) throughout the

year. The mawlid of al-Mu˙arram, marking the start of the New Year, became

an important occasion under the direction of Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥al-Ishråq (no. 16). The sources do little more than mention the observance of

this holiday.66 Nor do we have any details of the Waf å’iyya’s observance of

their mawlid of the eighth month, Sha>bån, from the 18th to the 23rd.67 One cel-

ebrated occasion, unique to the Waf å’iyya, was their takniyya. At this annual

gathering the khalifa of the order would bestow a surname, or kunya, upon each

of those attending. We know this was an early practice within the order since

al-Zawåw•, in his dream journal, describes a visit from >Al• Waf å’ in which the

saint changes al-Zawåw•’s kunya. Apparently, the fourth khalifa, Ab¥ al-Siyådåt

Ya˙ya ibn Waf å’, had conferred upon him the name Ab¥ >Åbid, which was

here changed to Ab¥ Óåmid.68 One date given for the takniyya ceremony is 27

Rama∂ån,69 but al-Jabart• mentions that he received the kunya Ab¥ al->Azmfrom Shihåb al-D•n A˙mad Ab¥ al-Imdåd (no. 18) in the year 1177/1764, as

part of the celebration of the mawlid al-nab• (the Prophet’s birthday).70 This

mawlid takes place on the eleventh day of the month of al-Rab•> al-Awwal. A

fourth occasion is also mentioned, that of the m•>å d . The term may be translated

as either “promise” or “meeting,” but unfortunately no details of this event are

recorded in our sources.71

Fortunately however, details of the investiture of novices have come down

to us. This should not surprise us since the ceremony was rather colourful. Acommon ritual, from the earliest sufi organizations, was the passing down of a

shaykh’s mantle (khirqa) to his successor, as a sign of endorsement. However,

in the medieval period the practice of handing down a mantle became degraded

and referred usually to a simple induction into an order.72 Many energetic sufis

“received the khirqa” from shaykhs of more than one order. Ab¥ Fa∂l >Abd al-

Ra˙mån, the brother of the third khalifa of the Waf å’iyya, is credited with

instituting a peculiar form of khirqa passing, centered not around a mantle but

around the t å j and shadd (crown and belt).73 We have no description of this

investiture ceremony, but it seems likely that the “crown” was a colored fabricto be worn as part of one’s normal headdress as later became common practice

for members of sufi orders during public gatherings. As for the belt, the story

of the min† aq of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ being passed down to >Al•—representing

the transfer of his elegance and charisma—comes to mind.

As we saw earlier, Shaykh Shams al-D•n Ab¥ al-Anwår (no. 19) had an

important impact on the fortunes of the Waf å’ zå wiya. Also, a significant




Ab¥ al-Anwår, before his death in 1228/1813, had designated his nephew

A˙mad Ab¥ al-Iqbål (no. 20) as his successor to not only the direction of the

Waf å’ order but also to the position of naq• b al-ashr

å f and control of the al-

Óusayn mawlid and shrine.82 However, the Pasha was not swayed by these

appointments. Instead, he moved to divest the Waf å’s of any authority beyond

their own order. A˙mad Ab¥ al-Iqbål was dismissed from the office of naq• b

al-ashr å f , the post being transferred to Mu˙ammad al-Dawåkhil• for a period

of three years and then back into the Bakr• line.83 Neither was A˙mad Ab¥ al-

Iqbål to inherit control of the Óusayn shrine. Contrary to the wishes of Ab¥ al-

Anwår, the Pasha appointed the merchant al-Ma˙r¥q• to the post, above Ab¥

al-Iqbål.84

Although the written sources have not allowed us to embark on a thorough

historical study of the the formative period of the Waf å’iyya, we should note

that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ spent his early years in the shadow of an important

event. This was the appearance of the theologian and Óanbalite jurist Ibn

Taymiyya (d. 728/1328). A gifted writer and speaker, Ibn Taymiyya convinc-

ingly challenged a number of common devotional practices—in particular, many

forms of pilgrimage to holy places—and certain mystical teachings of Ibn>Arab•.85 Despite his abilities, and the support of some, he spent much of his

career imprisoned in Damascus or Cairo. One of his major opponents in Egypt

was Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•, the third head of the Shådhiliyya and the mas-

ter of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s teacher, Då’¥d Ibn Båkhilå.86 Due to the opposition

of Sufi shaykhs such as Ibn >A†å’ Allåh and Ibn Taymiyya’s political clumsi-

ness, the latter’s polemics had little real impact on the religious practices of his

time.87 However, in Egypt, Ibn Taymiyya’s arguments were repeated by a few

strident polemicists in the eighth/fourteenth century. The anti–Ibn >Arab• cam-paign then gathered momentum in the next century.88 However, a recent study

of these polemics has concluded that the impact of the hard-line opponents of

Ibn >Arab•’s teachings was limited.89 The stalemate, if not victory, of the reli-

gious mainstream with Ibn Taymiyya and his later emulators must have had

some impact on Mu˙ammad Waf å’. The details of his education, and more

importantly the intellectual activities of his father, Mu˙ammad al-Awsa†, at the

family zå wiya in Alexandria, have not come down to us, but it is certain that

Mu˙ammad Waf å’s exposure to Akbarian thought was at least indirectly encour-

aged by the succesful defence of Ibn >Arab• in Egypt. The situation, however, ismurky since neither Mu˙ammad nor >Al• Waf å’ mention these wider debates in

their writings.

A general note should be made here of the religious climate prevailing

in Cairo during the lifetime of >Al•. Although Sh•>ism, since the fall of the

Få†imids, had very little organized presence in Egypt, the eighth/fourteenth




and ninth/fifteenth centuries saw the flowering of a truly international com-

munity in Cairo. Under the third reign of al-Nåßir Mu˙ammad (709/1309–

741/1340) an unprecedented number of khå nqå hs were built—most of whichhoused foreign sufi communities.90 While these khå nqå hs were certainly not

bastions of Sh•>• thought, they did represent the occasion for an exchange of

ideas between Cairo and other regions of the Islamic world. There representa-

tives of the mystical traditions of Syria, Iran, Iraq, and Yemen may well have

transmitted pro->Alid concepts and traditions into the intellectual milieu of

>Al• Waf å’.91 We do know also that some form of Sh•>ism survived in Middle

Egypt, particularly around Akhm•m and Q¥s, the region in which Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ established his first zå wiya.

If the details of the intellectual roots of the Waf å’iyya are unavailable to us,92

the historical presence of the order and the family are not. Broadly speaking, we

saw that this family was derived from the family of the Prophet, through Idr•s

ibn >Abd Allåh, and that its origins were Maghrebi. At roughly the same time

as al-Shådhil• was establishing his order in Alexandria, Mu˙ammad Waf å’s

grandfather was building his zå wiya-mosque in the same city. Strictly speaking,

however, the Waf å’iyya began only once Mu˙ammad Waf å’ had established

himself in Cairo and had determined to sever himself from his Shådhil• roots.

From this point on, the new sufi order, animated by the mystical writings andsaintly figures of the father and son founders, began to thrive. For reasons

unknown to us, this order remained within the Waf å’ family rather than branch-

ing out into the population at large. The followers of this Way were never

numerous, and most ritual practices, except the processions, were not con-

ducted in public. No detailed account of the training of adepts has come down

to us, but it would not be unreasonable to assume that a high level of learning

was expected, thus constituting an elite group of followers. This elitism would

have been necessary, regardless, in light of the Akbarian basis of Mu˙ammadWaf å’s mystical teachings. We shall discuss this basis in subsequent chapters.

Of significance also is the later history of the Waf å’ family in the religious

institutions of Cairo. The office of naq• b al-ashr å f was held at various times by

Waf å’s, after the mid-twelfth/eighteenth century. Also of note was the impor-

tant role played by Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Anwår in the develop-

ment of the Óusayn mawlid and the expansion of the shrine-mosque of the

same name. We may conclude with the general observation that the sanctity of

the Waf å’iyya began on a sure footing. The founding figures were recognized

as inspired mystical writers whose hagiography supported their sanctity. Yet as

a family-based sufi order, the latter Waf å’ shaykhs’ claim to authority seems to

have rested more on the charisma of their sharifan descent.93




Figure 1. Cairo cemetery (City of the Dea



Figure 2. Entrance to Waf å’ mosque



Figure 3. Tombs in Waf å’ mosque



Figure 4. Grave marker, >Al• Waf å’



Figure 5. The Waf å

’ house



Figure 6. Remains of fountain in Waf å

’ house



The Waf å’s in Cairo (del. N. Lacoste)



(Table 1.0)

The Early Wafå’iyya

Mu˙ammad al-Najm (from Sfax / Tunis) (d. ?, Alexandria)

Mu˙ammad al-Awsa† (d. ?, Alexandria)

Mu˙ammad Wafå’ (702/1302-765/1363, Cairo)

Shihåb al-D•n A˙mad Ab¥ al->Abbås (d. 814/1412) >Al• Wafå’ (759/1357–807/1405)

Ab¥ al-Fat (d. 852/1448) Ibråh•m Ab¥ al-Makårim (d. 833/1428)

Ab¥ al-Fa∂l (d. 814/1410) Ya˙ia Ab¥ al-Siyådåt (d. 857/1453)

Ab¥ al-Jawd Óasan (d. 805/1405)

Shams al-D•n Ab¥ al-Maråhim (d. 867/1462)

Mu˙ibb al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Fa∂l (d. 888/1462)

(daughters)

Burhån al-D•n Ibråh•m Ab¥ al-Makårim (d. 908/1502) (sons)

Óusnå (d. 888/1483)

Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Fa∂l (d. 942/1536) Ra˙ma (d. ?)

Du˙å (d. ?)

Ab¥ al->Abbås A˙mad (d. 825/1421)

Ab¥ al-Tayyib Mu˙ammad (d. 807/1405)

Ab¥ al-Tåhir Mu˙ammad (d. in Yemen?)

Ab¥ al-Qåsim Mu˙ammad (d. 833/1429)



Before discussing the thought of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’, we should take a

closer look at their literary production. Since almost all of this material

remains in manuscript form, something of a preliminary description seems inorder. Beyond our immediate project, which is a better understanding of the

concept of walå ya, this chapter will bring to light sources that other researchers

might find useful. It should be noted also that these descriptions are summary in

nature and that they only hint at the entire philosophy of Mu˙ammad and >Al•

Waf å’. A number of themes mentioned here will be dealt with in detail in later

chapters, while others will be left for future study.

All the major biographical writers of the nineth/fifteenth century seem to

have taken note of the charismatic figures Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’. How-

ever, some of these early accounts were rather hostile, criticizing both the doc-

trinal content of their writings and their comportment with their followers. The

famous detractor of Ibn >Arab•, >Abd al-Ra˙mån al-Sakhåw• (d. 903/1497),1

presents one assessment of >Al• Waf å’: “His poetry cries out mystical union

(itti˙å d ) (with the Divine) to the point of heresy—and likewise the verse of his

father.”2 This accusation of blurring the distinction between the worshipper

and God became common in antisufi polemics. In this particular assessment,

however, al-Sakhåw• is quoting directly from an earlier source, Ibn Óajar al-

>Asqalån• (d. 852/1449).3 As noted in the previous chapter, Ibn Óajar alsoobjected to the practice of the companions of >Al• Waf å’ prostrating themselves

to him. With regard to Ibn >Arab•, al->Asqalån• seems to have taken an unevenly

negative stand.4

Of course, these criticisms were not the last word on the Waf å’iyya. The

writer/compiler >Abd al-Wahhåb al-Sha>rån• (d. 973/1565) held both the father

Chapter 4

The Writings of the Waf å’s



and son in high esteem. In his immensely popular biographical dictionary of

sufi figures, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å (or Lawå qih al-anwå r fi † abaqå t al-akhyå r ),

his longest entry by far is on >Al• Waf å’.5

This priority of place accorded to >Al•can be accounted for partially by Sha>rån•’s association with the Shådhiliyya

order in Egypt.6 However, the sheer size of the entry, forty-three pages, calls

for some reflection. The notice on Mu˙ammad Waf å’ is barely one page long,

while that for al-Shådhil• is only eight and a half. Not surprisingly, in light of

other works dedicated wholly to him, Ibn >Arab• receives less than one page in

the ˇ abaqå t . The fact that Mu˙ammad Waf å’s shaykh, Ibn Båkhilå, is quoted

at some length (nineteen pages) makes it clear that Sha>rån• was intentionally

focusing on this branch of the Shådhiliyya. Here we might propose that since

Sha>rån• had taken it upon himself to make Ibn >Arab•’s teachings more acces-

sible, he must have seen >Al• Waf å’ as the inheritor of this great shaykh. We

also saw in the last chapter that Sha>rån• had established personal contacts with

the shaykhs of the Waf å’iyya order and family. As will be seen in the next

chapters, Sha>rån•’s quotations of >Al• Waf å’ do indeed point out his debt to Ibn

>Arab•’s work. However, Sha>rån• nowhere describes >Al• or the Waf å’iyya as

“Akbarian,” nor does he explicitely mention any parallels in their doctrine.

Since no new documents are likely to present themselves, we can only surmise

Sha>rån•’s intentions. My guess is that his earlier interest in Ibn >Arab• madehim responsive to the work of >Al• Waf å’ and that his long entry in al-ˇ abaqå t

al-kubr å was an effort to advertise what had become in Egypt the latest mani-

festation of Akbarian mystical teaching.

Although the writings of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ do not seem to have

circulated widely—except via Sha>rån•’s ˇ abaqå t and to a lesser degree his

Yawå q• t —they have not fallen into utter obscurity. Al-Suy¥†• (d. 911/1505) quotes

from >Al• Waf å’ in his Ta’y• d al-˙aq• qa al-> aliyya (pp. 73, 74). In the latter

tenth/sixteenth century a commentary on Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Kit å b al-azal waswritten by one Ab¥ al-Madad ibn A˙mad (d. 1008/1599), entitled Kashf al-

asr å r al-azaliyya.7 Also, the famous Syrian figure al-Nåbulus• (d. 1143/1730)

was somewhat familiar with the poetry of >Al• Waf å’. He quotes from it in his

commentary on Shaykh Arslån’s Riså la.8 The founder of the † ar • qa Sam-

måniyya, Mu˙ammad >Abd al-Kar•m al-Sammån (d. 1189/1775), also quotes

from this source.9 Also in the twelfth/eighteenth century, the Khalwat• leader

A˙mad al-Dard•r (d. 1201/1786) wrote a commentary on a Waf å’ prayer.10 The

popular Egyptian writer Y¥suf Shirbin•, also of the late 18th century, quotes

four unlikely lines from >Al• Waf å’ in his Hazz al-qu˙¥ f .11 In modern-day Egypt,

the sufi shaykh al-Óajj Óamd• Óizåb has quoted from >Al• Waf å’ in an exposi-

tion on the preexistence of the light of the prophet Mu˙ammad.12 Nevertheless,

with the Waf å’ writings having remained for the most part unpublished in the

modern era (with the exception of Mu˙ammad’s Kit å b al-azal and D• wå n) it

cannot be said that they enjoy a wide cirulation among sufis.




Poetry

As we have seen, Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ were well known as composersof mystical poetry. A collection of poetry from each of them has been pre-

served. The D• wå n of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ has recently been published along

with a commentary.13 It consists of forty-five poems (qaßå ’id , sing. qaß• da),

followed by al-T å ’iyya al-kubr å , which is comprised of 1002 hemistiches.

This long poem is the subject of a kind of poetic auto-commentary, or takhm• s,

in which each hemistich is restated but then completed with three new lines of

poetry. Eighteen short qaßå ’id follow. The poetry is sophisticated, touching on

a variety of mystical themes.14

The D• wå n of >Al• Waf å’ has not been published, but I have consulted a

copy of the 188 folio manuscript. The work is a lengthy collection of poems of

various lengths and styles, ranging from four lines to over forty. The hemistiches

are usually divided by markers, and voweling is supplied. There is no com-

mentary supplied, and beyond the occasional notice of the rhyming letter, there

are no significant titles. As we saw earlier, the Waf å’s were noted for their

composition in the complex style of the muwashsha˙. However, in this D• wå n

none of the poems seems to be in this style.15

At first reading, one sees that this is dense mystical poetry. It is significantthat many of the pieces are written in the voice of the divine first Person. In

some cases it is clear that the narrator is God, but in others it is possible to take

the poet as the voice. In the following example the poet is conversing with

existence, which has been exiled from God:

All existence asked me who I am.

I answered, I am the most foreign of foreigners.16

Existence said, Then you are that through which my substanceis wealthy, because you are the poorest of the poor.

To me are the wonders and marvels which are in

the perception of (both) the ignorant and the wise.

In Surat al-Ikhlåß came my exile.17

The rational thinkers marvel at the freedmen.18

The following verse may be understood to be either in the voice of the Divine

creative aspect or from the perspective of the Mu˙ammadan Reality (i.e., Perfect

Human). The Akbarian doctrine of the Perfect Human held this individual to

be the isthmus between God and creation (not unlike the role the First Intellect

played for the Neoplatonists).

I am the final point, in whose shadow

you will find that which opened existence and ranked (it).

The Writings of the Waf å ’s 73



Thus I am the pole of existence and center point

of the source which is the unseen of the seeing, (and) hidden from it. 19

The following is in the same vein, but communicates a certain finality. The

claim to being a Seal, of some kind, is implied.

I am the pole of existence without doubt,

and the imam who guides those of my time.

My time is an all-encompassing era,

in which the existence of meanings has expired.

If the veil is annihilated from the eye (> ain) of my unveiling,

the secret witnesses its unseen in my elucidation.

Discard “becoming” (m… ) from your witnessing and obliterate

the dot of the letter ghain (Á ) if you want to see me.20

This collection also contains a number of devotional pieces, some directed to

God, others to the Prophet. These poems may well have had a use in the ritual

practices of the Waf å’iyya order, although this remains an open question.

Supplications (du>å )

Prayer compositions have played an important role in the founding of sufi

orders. It appears that all orders use devotional prayers (a zå b, sing. ˙izb) in

their communal ritual. Often, these are the compositions of the eponymous

founder. As we noted in chapter 2, Ibn Båkhilå even wrote a commentary on

one of the a zå b of Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•. There are a number of signifi-

cant dimensions to these prayers, the most important of which is the claim towalå ya by the author. These are inspired compositions, which are bestowed

only upon saintly figures. The popular success of a ˙izb is invariably tied to, or

reflects upon, the sanctity of its progenitor. In other words, these prayers serve

as vehicles for the spiritual authority of their authors.

The ritual function of these prayers must also be considered. Their recita-

tion, in addition to the practice of dhikr (repetition of the names of God), is

central to sufi worship. It would be hard to conceive of the gathering of a sufi

order without ˙izb recitation. It is significant that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ composed

a zå b (or at least has them attributed to him), since these compositions would

have been essential for an independent order to break away from the Shåd-

hiliyya. In other words, Mu˙ammad Waf å’s assertion that he was no longer a fol-

lower of the Shådhil• way, but rather the founder of a new order, in part rested on

his ability to produce divinely inspired prayers. This claim to independence

relied on his walå ya being recognized by his followers, and new a zå b were

part of this claim to sanctity.21




It should not surprise us then to find a zå b attributed to Mu˙ammad

Waf å’. In manuscript form we have Ó izb al-så d å t f • jå mi> al-asr å r , Ó izb al-

fard å niyya and Ó izb al-azal.22

In the bibliographical record there also was a Ó izb al-fat published in Egypt at the turn of the century.23

Jurisprudence ( fiqh) and Exegesis ( tafs• r)

Although the fame of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ was based on their poety and

their mystical writings, they were trained in jurisprudence of the Målik • rite. To

Mu˙ammad is attributed a work on fiqh, Bahjat al-irshå d (The Splendor of

Guidance); although the early sources do not make note of it.24 Attributed to

>Al•, and also now lost, is a fiqh work the title of which suggests it dealt with

the four legal schools in some way: al-Kawthar al-mutra> min al-ab˙ur al-

arba> (The Kawthar full from the four seas).25 Mention is made of this book by

al->Asqalån• in the nineth/fifteenth century.26 He is also the only source to men-

tion the Bå> ith > alå al-khalåß f • a˙wå l al-khawåßß (The Occasion of Deliverance

in the States of the Elite). I have not seen this work, but it has recently been

found under a slightly different title, and listed as author unknown, in the

British Library.27 This work is apparently a defence of preachers and story-tellers (qußßåß) as transmitters of religious knowledge. In this debate >Al• Waf å’

argues against those who would restrict the dissemination of religious teaching

to the professional class of the ulama.28 Ibn al->Imåd, among others, tells that

>Al• also wrote a Qur’an commentary (tafs• r ).29 The sixteenth-century collec-

tion of exegetes, ˇ abaqå t al-mufassir • n, notes >Al• Waf å’s tafs• r , yet provides

no details.30 This work does not appear to have survived.

Mystical Treatises (Mu˙ammad Waf å’)

This group of writings certainly represents the primary intellectual effort of

Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’. As we shall see when we return to our discussion

of the doctrine of sanctity in the next chapter, the mystical speculations of the

Waf å’s fall generally into the tradition of Ibn >Arab•. This is not to say, how-

ever, that these two writers saw their purpose as one of simply expanding upon

the thought of Ibn >Arab•. This task fell to a group of thinkers we may place in

the “Akbarian school” proper. Of these the most outstanding were Íadr al-D•nal-Q¥naw• (d. 673/1274), Mu’ayyad al-D•n al-Jand• (d. cir. 700/1300), >Abd al-

Razzåq al-Qåshån• (d. cir. 735/1334), and Då’¥d al-Qayßar• (d. 751/1351).31

These figures composed a number of commentaries on the works of Ibn >Arab•,

in addition to their own mystical writings in the Akbarian tradition. In contrast,

Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ composed no such commentaries, nor do they

mention Ibn >Arab•’s name, yet their writing relied heavily on his philosophy.




The Kit å b al-azal (The Book of Preexistence), stands out among the writ-

ings of Mu˙ammad Waf å’. While formally a commentary on the Names of

God, it is a philosophical text, clearly in the tradition of Ibn >Arab•. It consistsof sixty-one sections, some of which are only a few sentences in length. In the

introduction (p. 12), the editor describes the text as belonging to the “Oneness

of Being” (wa˙dat al-wuj¥d ) school. This assessment bears up upon inspec-

tion. It should also be said that this text is significant for its systematic use of

philosophical terminology. It is not inconceivable, therefore, that our author

was influenced by the writings of Akbarian followers, such as al-Q¥naw•, who

had interpreted Ibn >Arab• in quite philosophical terms. We shall return to this

subject in later chapters.

The Kit å b al-azal touches on a variety of specific concepts, but the idea of

the “Oneness of Being” recurs. Typical in style and vocabulary is the following

from the section entitled “Realities”:

The Name “He” (al-Huwa) is the absolute name, which is the

reality of the [divine] Essence which you can neither know, nor be

ignorant of .32

The reality of the other [than God] (al-ghayr ) is independence in

person (nafs) and in existence (wuj¥d ). Yet, a thing only has existenceby His existence, so there is no real independence. When the condi-

tion is absent, then so is the conditioned, thus there is no “other.”

[God] the Manifest then requires the other; but being either Manifest

or Nonmanifest does not penetrate to the absolute Essence, which is

Him. Likewise [is the case for] all the levels of differentiation, oppo-

sition, difference, homologousness and contrariness. All of this [i.e.

qualification] is not said of Him, rather it is said to the levels of exis-

tence and possibility, according to what is appropriate to each level.33

Thus creation, or the “other,” has no independent existence; its existence is

conditional upon that of the Divine. Without God’s existence nothing else can

be. Further, this conditional existence is qualified by the infinite levels of dif-

ferentiation through which it may pass. It is this qualification that makes con-

ditional existence distinct from its divine source and makes it apparent to us

here below. The idea of a single existence, shared by all, is clear. We are told

that existence “is one in itself, with no duality or plurality. There is no exis-

tence to any existent, except He.”34

Elsewhere the creative movement from God is described as the Throne,

which serves as the existential medium for all creation. We are told,

The Throne (> arsh) is that by which what was not came into being;

and what had not been thought was thought. Everything that reaches




form or conception does so by [the Throne’s] power . . . The entity

(k å ’in) is by it, and it [the Throne] is in it. It is not possible for [the

entity] to be removed from it [the Throne]. It [the Throne] is like thesea, and the entities are as its waves.35

Thus all entities come into being thanks to the Throne. They take their own

forms in this process, but in the end they are simply variations within a univer-

sal whole.

Our comments on the mystical philosophy of Kit å b al-azal are necessarily

brief, having served here only as an indicator of that work’s content and style.

Of course, to describe a work as being in the wa˙dat al-wuj¥d tradition is only

a start, leaving serious reading yet to be done. However, we may, in general,

restate the importance of this work as Mu˙ammad Waf å’s most philosophically

consistent effort. The style and vocabulary is unlike that used in his other

expositions of mystical thought.

A work that is more typical of the literary production of Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ is Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n f • alwå˙ al-kitmå n (The Marks of Gnosis on the

Tablets of Secrecy). The language used is less philosophical in tone, but many

of the concepts that are to be found in Kit å b al-azal are present in this work.

The text is divided into 114 “marks” (note the number of suras in the Qur’an isalso 114) , or sha>å ’ir . Strangely, the Dår al-Kutub manuscript consists of only

the first 108 “marks.”36 The first pages contain short enigmatic phrases in

rhyming prose (saj> ). For example,

Praise be to God who blots out the sunan (customary practices)

with the sunan,

And completes the graces with the graces,

[He is] is the appearance of the secret in the open,And the entry of time into time.

[He is] the collector of the nations into nations,37

Producing wisdom by [His] Wisdom.

He sent down the spirits in the angelic forms,

Making clear for the eloquent and the unintelligible.

He mixed obscurity into the clarification.

A speaker was not silent, nor did he speak.

He has caused the evenings to run into the mornings,38

He who is unsure [in faith]36 neither perceives nor speaks.

He obscured the secrets within the lights,

And the mute and dumb spoke.40

The style is certainly allusive, but the mystic theme of hidden truths is central.

With a deceptive change in form, the first sha>• ra presents a number of mystical




definitions. However, they are so concise that they seem to evoke more ques-

tions than they answer. We read,

Mystical union (itti˙å d ) is the last of the levels of withness;41 . . .

Humility is the quieting of the soul along the path of eternity; . . .

Scrupulousness is choosing the preferable; . . . Hope is awareness of

the occurrence (˙uß¥l); . . . Spiritual chivalry ( futuwwa) is vision by

the eye of beauty. Joy is witnessing from pure mercy (ra˙ma); . . .

Wisdom (˙ikma) is witnessing union in difference; . . . Perspicacity

( fir å sa) is the extraction of the unseen from the seen. Glorification is

the memory of al-Óaqq in everything; . . . Gnosis (ma> rifa) is witness-

ing al-Óaqq in all things by His Rule (˙ukm).42

The remaining sha>å ’ir take a more discursive form, touching in some detail

on mystical themes. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ takes up cosmology on a number of

occasions. The three worlds of the Corporeal (mulk ), Sovereign (malak ¥t ), and

Omnipotent ( jabar ¥t ) are sometimes assigned angels (Isråf •l, Michael, and

Gabriel respectively).43 In sha>• ra 29, the human faculties such as gnosis, vision,

inspiration, and bewilderment are tied into the levels of creation.44 These levels

of creation are elsewhere described as the divine possibilities (as distinct fromthe necessary), which can be divided into three: the world of command (>å lam

al-amr ), the world of creation (>å lam al-khalq), and the world of becoming

(>å lam al-kawn).45

In the Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n the themes of oneness and the divine origin of cre-

ation are also present. There are veils that serve to differentiate between the

various modes of necessary being and thus are responsible for the levels of cre-

ation. Their ultimate source, however, remains an aspect of the Divine. We

read, “If the veil of beings (Hm…!H njß) is raised then the majesty of humanity(hs˚!H˝hl“) will appear. If the veil of mankind is raised then the face of the

Merciful will manifest.”46 From the perspective of the individual soul, the

divine is not far off either. We are told, “The interior of the heart is the mirror

of al-Óaqq and the site of sincerity. He to whom his Lord makes Himself

known has his heart turned to Him, and in it (his heart) appear the lights of His

Truth.”47 Further along, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ repeats a favorite hadith among the

sufis, as an elucidation of the soul’s proximity to the divine: “He who knows

himself knows his lord.”48

Another major work of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ is the Naf å ’is al-> irf å n min

anf å s al-Ra˙må n (The Gems of Gnosis from the Breaths of the Merciful). It

consists of 295 “gems.” The Dår al-Kutub manuscript provides a twelve-folio

introduction, which is absent from the Azhariyya manuscript. At least some of

this introduction is simply taken from elsewhere in the body of the text (e.g.,

gems 276, 278, 281, 285). The Dår al-Kutub manuscript, in turn, omits gems




113–233, which appear in the Azhariyya and Berlin copies.49 A short version,

consisting of only 50 “gems,” has been published.50

Although it is not possible for us to summarize this work—due to its com-partmentalized structure—we may offer samples of the important themes and

questions. First, as a general observation it can be said that this work is written

using less philosophical terminology than the previous two titles we have

described. More typically sufi themes are also addressed. In the introduction

there is discussion of the link between the spiritual follower and his shaykh.

We read, for example, “He who knows himself knows his shaykh . . . He who

does not find his shaykh does not find his heart; he who does not find his heart

has failed to find his Lord . . . Your shaykh is he who empties you of yourself,

and fills you with himself.”51 There is also a significant discussion of walå ya in

a number of naf å ’is. These statements will be incorporated into our discussion

in chapter 6 below.

In a number of places Mu˙ammad Waf å’ takes up the subject of the three

worlds, or three levels of creation,52 as was done in Sh>å ’ir al-> irf å n.The lowest

level is that of the Corporeal world (:g˜HL ©h¨), which is associated with the five

senses and is linked via the “common sense” (Únja¬ Sπ) to the World of Sover-

eignty (Ôm;gl©HL ©h¨). This world is the level of the intellect and the five internal

senses. From here the link is made by the “common intellect” (Únja¬ Gr¨) to theWorld of Omnipotence (ÔMnföHL ©h¨). This is the level of the five comprehen-

sions (Ôh≈hπH) and is linked by the “Throne of the Merciful”53 to the absolute

Necessary (Rgx¬ Ïm“M), which itself is from the essence of God. We will discuss

the details of this cosmology in more detail in chapter 5.

The manuscript also touches on the subject of the relation of God’s pre-

existence to his everlastingness. In naf • sa 25 these two aspects of the divine are

shown to be accessible to the gnostic.

The One said, From every side I am the First as the Merciful and the

Last in Humanity; the Apparent in creation, and the Hidden in truth.

So he who knows Me thus and realizes Me in all this, I have gathered

his last into his first, and numbered his apparent among his hidden, so

that he becomes pre-existent (hd©BH) without an end to his first, and

becomes everlasting (h∂vl∑) without an external to his internal.54

Thus, the human soul, by knowing God, may attain to a mode of eternity.

There are a number of other substantial discussions taken up. Of these, perhaps

the most interesting are those of the variety of divine Names, the various

divine Presences in creation, or the effusion of creation itself by way of the

First Intellect (˝M!HGru©H).

Moving further away from philosophical language and style is Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’s Kit å b al-ma>å r • j (The Book of Ladders).55 The single form of




ma>å r • j is mi> r å j, which may also signify the Prophet Mu˙ammad’s night jour-

ney to the heavens. Mystics such as Ab¥ Yaz•d al-Bas†åm• and Ibn >Arab• fol-

lowed this prophetic model with accounts of their own ascensions into theheavens,56 but this manuscript describes no such event. The general direction

of the work is one that presents prayer, in its various forms, as various “lad-

ders” upward. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ treats questions of ßalå t , describing its possi-

ble spiritual types. He associates, for example, various bodily locations with

elements of communal prayer.57 In the latter part of the work it seems that

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ has come to substitute the word mi> r å j for what usually in

Sufi writings would be the maqå m (spiritual station). Scattered throughout the

text also are a number of minor mystical commentaries on certain passages

from the Qur’an.

A shorter work, of only thirteen folios, is Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Íuwar al-

n¥r å niyya f • > ul¥m al-sarayå niyya (The Luminous Forms of the Sciences of Dis-

persion). It is divided into twenty-five sections, or ßuwar (sing. ß¥ra). These

sections are given titles such as the following: “The Form of the Mu˙ammadan

Spirits” ( ß¥rat al-arwå˙ al-Mu˙ammadiyya), “The Form of Prayer” (ß¥rat al-

ßalå t ), “The Form of the Key” (ß¥rat al-mift å˙), “The Form of Descent” (ß¥rat

al-tanazzul). The first folios, however, contain short statements that may be

described as something between definitions and aphorisms. For example, weread, “The witnessing of al-Óaqq in all things is the straight path to God” and

“Elucidation is an existence based upon the mental faculties of the finders.”58

Some of the “Forms” are quite short, for example two related definitions are:

“The Form Pre-existence is the essence of the unseen, beyond the attribute of

existential sharing (flVm“m©H ÚHnjå!H). The Form Everlasting is the essence of

(physical) seeing within the attribute of existential sharing.”59 These pro-

nouncements are certainly brief. The term existential sharing is unusual, but

here it seems to be an equivalent to creation, in as much as it conditionallypartakes in the permanent divine Existence.60 Elsewhere, however, ideas are a

little more fleshed out. Thus, in the “Form of Indwelling” (ß¥rat al-˙ul¥l)

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ explains that there are two different perceptions of (Divine)

Indwelling. This indwelling is a kind of unveiling, the mistaken perception of

which is reached by delusion (takhayyul). A second perception, that by verifi-

cation (ta˙q• q), is sound. This sound perception may then attain one of two

different kinds of indwelling, either that of connecting (ta> alluq) or divine

Self-disclosure (tajall• ). The manuscript is corrupt in a number of places, but

we may propose the following reading:

The Form of Indwelling is the first of the levels of unveiling, which is

false by the corruption of delusion, but is sound by verification. This

indwelling is of two kinds, [the first is] the “indwelling of connection.”

This is like knowledge as it is connected to the known, or as decree is




connected to the decreed. It is a causal connection . . . It is said of the

“indwelling of connection” that it is a union (itti˙å d ) by the compre-

hension of the connected by the connecting and not as the union(itti˙å d ) of a substance with an accident. . . [Of the second kind], the

“indwelling of Self-disclosure,” it is called “oneness”; it is without

the metaphor of duality or withness, for this is absolute comprehen-

sion (i˙å† a mu† laqa), like water which is held together in ice.61

Thus the “indwelling of connection” concerns the union of the effect with the

cause, not the inherence of the accident in the substance. In this sense, its exis-

tential basis is fleeting. The indwelling of Self-disclosure (˙ul¥l al-tajall• ) is

part of the eternal Divine. It is not the result of a causal relationship, rather it is

part of the absolute Oneness of God.

In his Mift å˙ al-s¥r min > ayn al-khabar (The Key to the Enclosure from the

Source of Intelligence) Mu˙ammad Waf å’ takes up for discussion a number of

concepts related to worship. One of these is the word ˙amd (praise), which

operates on a number of existential levels and which has a role to play in the

Divine act of creation.62 Other terms and names receiving elaboration or com-

mentary are “al-Ra˙må n al-Ra˙• m” (the Merciful, the Compassionate), “ M å liki

yawm al-d • n” (Lord of the day of judgment) and al-Malik (Lord / King).Mu˙ammad Waf å’ also devotes three folios to a discussion of the mystical sig-

nificance of various letters of the alphabet.63 It is significant that at the outset of

this work Mu˙ammad Waf å’ makes clear the inspired nature of his composition.

We read, “He (Mu˙ammad Waf å’) said: ‘I heard God in my secret / essence

(Înß) say, ‘I by Myself am the Secret without end. My Existence is from Its

own sufficiency. And the source of sources in Me does not change.”64

Another substantial work is Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Kit å b ta’ß• l al-azmå n wa

taf ß• l al-akwå n (The Book of the Foundation of Times and the Particularizationof Beings).65 The text deals with a number of themes, including the mystical

dimensions of various prophets. Cosmology is also discussed. In one instance

a four-fold hierarchy is laid out, called the “levels of the four thrones.” This

model is distinct from the well-known model of the three worlds of mulk ,

malak ¥t, and jabar ¥t . At the first throne, that of the level of natural disposi-

tions (&hf≈), we find the four elements (water, earth, wind, and fire) and the

three entities (mineral, plant, and animal). At the second throne, that of sover-

eignty (malak ¥t ), we find the hearts and the subtleties of humanity. We also

find the following four “elements,” which are the faculties of conceiving ( fikr ),

remembrance (dhikr ), preservation (˙af Ω), and fantasy (khayå l). The three enti-

ties present are the angels, the jinn, and the demons. The third throne is called

the “world of (Divine) command.” This is the location of the descending of the

Night of Power,66 and the true location of witnessing the Divine. The four ele-

ments here are the four spirits (∏HMNH), which are called “God be praised”




(sub˙an Allå h), “Praise be to God” (al- amdu li Allå h), “there is no God” (lå

ilå ha), and “God is Greatest” ( Allå hu Akbar ). The three entities—reflecting mis-

sion, prophecy, and sainthood—are the Divine dispatch (irså l), notification(inbå ’), and friendship (walå ’). The fourth throne is that of necessity. It is the

level of God. The four elements are the First, the Last, the Apparent, and the Hid-

den (cf. Q. 57:3). The place of the three entities is held by the Divine Names,

Attributes and Essence.67 It is interesting to note in this model the use of both

philosophical categories and devotional vocabulary as parts of a cosmology.

As its title suggests, Al-Maqå må t al-saniyya li al-så da al-ß¥ fiyya (The

Sublime Stations of the Sufis), is to be located firmly in the arena of traditional

sufi writing. This short piece (nine folios) consists of 101 brief definitions.

Each definition is followed by a ˙aq• qa (reality) and a ghå ya (purpose), which

expand on the definition. The terms covered are what would be expected in

any sufi manual of spiritual discipline. For example, we find entries on Fear

(khawf ), Trust in God (tawakkul), Patience (ßabr ), Poverty ( faqr ), Tasting

(dhawq), Spiritual expansion (bas† ), Spiritual contraction (qab∂ ), Extinction

( fanå ’) and Gnosis (ma> rifa). The entry for the term Union ( jam> ) reads,

Union is the negation of “withness”, and the absence of differentiation

completely (]Üg;©hƒ). Its reality is the union (VhëH) of the levels of theworld into One which is self-determined with the existence of what is

thereby united in it. Its purpose is the vision (]ŸÂN) of the everlasting by

the eye of pre-existence, which neither speaks nor is spoken of.68

In the following entry Unity (taw˙• d ) is described as “a reality which does not

divide in oneness, nor is it distinguished by plurality, nor is it numerable as

numbers that have no end. Its reality is a meaning the hearts do not deny, but

which the intellects cannot imagine, and the eloquence of explanation does notreach it. Its purpose is negation of all others.”69 The “reality” and the “pur-

pose” seem to extend the initial abstract definition from the perspective of

either the cosmos or the individual. This structure, however, is not adhered to

strictly. Of Inspiration (ilhå m) we read, “ Ilhå m is revelation (wa y) which the

notion of al-Óaqq inspires in every heart that has lent its ear, and is a witness.

Its reality is the address (khi†å b) to the master of true tasting (dhawq). Its pur-

pose is the tongue speaking in words for which untruth is impossible.70

Another short piece is the Fuß¥l al-˙aqå ’iq (Sections on Realities). It opens

with two pages of supplication and then presents thirteen sections of varyinglength. The tone of the entire work reflects divine emanation and presence in

creation. The shortest section reads,

Praise be to the Self-discloser (§g[j˜Hhpfß) of the Secrets of His Pre-

existence, by [way of] the Commanding Spirit blown into the form of




knowledge by the essence of union (UlöHKÜuƒ). [The Spirit] lets each

benefit from a lordly Grace (la†• fa), and divine Tenuity (raq• qa);71 it

is by this Tenuity that [the Command’s] existence stands in its unseen,to which none may rise, and it is by that Grace that its essence ( > ayn)

is directed.72

It is difficult to read many of these Sections with certainty, since each seems to

have been composed independently. Sustained development here as in most of

Mu˙ammad Waf å’s other writings is lacking. Nevertheless, in the passage just

quoted it seems that the dynamic of creation is based on the Commanding

Spirit, which has an eternal unseen, in addition to the form it produces. This

form is sustained by a Grace and a Tenuity. The Tenuity povides an exitential

basis in the unseen, while the Grace determines its essence in the apparent.

The work Kit å b al-> ur ¥sh (Book of Thrones) may be found attributed to

both >Al• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’.73 Although not used in our study here, this

work deserves further attention.

Mystical Treatises (>Al• Waf å’)

In addition to the eleven titles of Mu˙ammad Waf å’, the al-Azhar majm¥> a,

(majåm•> 1076; Zak •: 41313) also has two short works it attributes to >Al• Waf å’.

The shorter, only four folios in length, entitled Libå s al-futuwwa (The Garments

of Chivalry), makes mention of >Al• twice; he is clearly the author. The six-folio

Kit å b al-wå rid å t (The Book of Spiritual Inrushes), however, makes no mention

of its author. The copyist notes on the front cover that this text is “something

from the wå rid å t of >Al•.” This is most certainly a reference to the long work

entitled Majm¥> wå rid å t > Al• ibn Waf å ’.74

Of the shorter work, Kit å b al-wå rid å t ,some comment may be made. As the title suggests (wå rid å t here having the

sense of spiritual inrushes) the work takes the form of concise sayings. We read,

He said, He who witnesses al-Óaqq in all things fears Him in all

things, and he who fears Him in all things believes in Him through

all things, and he who witnesses God alone, He appoints him ruler of

all things.

He said, He who is poor in God is rich in all (other) things, and

for him who is rich in God, all things are poor to him.75

Also discussed in this short work is the three-fold cosmology of mulk , malak ¥t ,

and jabar ¥t .76 Despite the copyist’s assertion, this text is not to be found in the

Majm¥> W å rid å t > Al• ibn Waf å . In fact it is made up of sections taken from

Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Naf å ’is. So too is the shorter Berlin manuscript.




One of >Al• Waf å’s longest works is a collection of spiritual advice to his

readers. The Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ (The Injunctions of >Al• Waf å’) exists

as a 110-folio manuscript.77

It also constitutes the first half (48 fols) of the Majm¥> W å rid å t > Al• ibn Waf å ’. A variety of topics is touched upon, including

existence, knowledge, and spiritual guidance. The Divine is the source of

existence and therefore the source of one’s understanding of Him. >Al• Waf å’

tells us,

He is the single existence present in every “one” (wå˙id ); He is the

Witnessed and the Witness. There is to each of His levels a saying,

and to each domain (˝h[¬) in Him a man. The wiseman only speaks by

the tongue of each level, and treats it only according to its measure

and scales: “We have only sent messengers in the language of their

people, to explain the sign to them.” (Q. 14:4)78

He also writes, “It is said that knowledge and gnosis and understanding are the

presence of a thing in oneself. Thus only He knows or understands anything;

so know who you are, oh he who knows only by his known!”79 Elsewhere he

adds, “The gnostic is the source (> ayn) of what he knows, and the verifier

(mu˙aqqiq) is the reality (˙aq• qa) of what he verifies (˙aqqaqahu).”80 Thistheme of mystical epistemology is extended by >Al• toward his understanding

of the spiritual guide. He writes,

If you find your true teacher, you have found your reality. If you

find your reality you have found God. If you find God, then you have

found everything; so everything desired is simply [to be found] in

love (wajd ) of this teacher.81

You are in the form in which you see your teacher, so see whatyou want. If you see him as creation, then you are a “creation.” If you

witness him as truth, then you are a “truth.” God said, “I am according

to My servant’s opinion of Me, so he thinks of Me as he wills.”82

This work is certainly the most simple in style and vocabulary of all the titles

from >Al• Waf å’. It must be seen as a central text for any understanding of the

teachings within the Waf å’iyya sufi order. In other words, this is the closest

thing to a novice’s handbook that has come down to us from >Al•.

The authorship of the Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya (The Book of LordlyHearings)83 is debatable. This lengthy work opens by telling us that what fol-

lows is from Mu˙ammad Waf å’ as recounted by his son >Al•. The question

quickly arises as to how >Al•, who would have been an infant when his father

died, could here be giving an account of his father’s teaching. Of course, >Al•

could have simply been relating these teachings according to the written record




his father had left behind. Perhaps this work should be understood as the son’s

digest of his father’s work. A closer comparison of all the relevant manuscripts

would be the only way to settle this question.The text itself is divided up into sections marked by the word listen!. The

overall tone is quite in line with the other writings. The following is illustra-

tive: “All existents are levels of your existence, in relation to you; for nothing

appears before you except that which is you, and is from you, and to you.” 84

Elsewhere we read, “The All is from you and to you, while He is your Ruler

[in creation], appointed by the decrees at each level [of creation] according to

[that level’s] ability. So note [reader] what you see. Each level has its saying,

and to each domain its man.”85 These notices reflect God as existence simply

manifested in different forms at different levels. At the same time, aspects of

the Divine may be found either in their necessary (eternal) form, or in their pos-

sible (temporal) form. >Al• Waf å’ writes, “The ‘Wise Spirit’of God (r ¥˙ ˙ak • m),

which is the starting point of the [human] virtues and praises, is the face of

[God’s] Lordship in the realm of possibility.”86 He then takes this a step further,

describing the distinction between the Divine and its worldly agents as the dif-

ference between the Spirit’s permanent and potential modes. “For him in whom

the divine Existence appears as the r ¥˙ ˙ak • m, he is the god, the lord, the truth,

by virtue of his existence; and he is the messenger, the prophet and the guidingsaint, by virtue of his possibility (imk å n).”87 The point here is that one who

receives the r ¥˙ ˙ak • m is divine inasmuch as he shares in necessary existence

but is only a messenger, prophet, or saint through his contingent being. In a

discussion that sheds light on the central role played by the spiritual advisor,

>Al• Waf å’ says, “If you know your teacher, the imam guiding you by his nec-

essary divine existence, then you know your Lord al-Óaqq. Do you know who

He is? He is simply the source of your divine existence, as determined for you

at the level of the distinction of your being.”88

It is the permanent aspect of theDivine that is presented to the seeker in the form of his guide. The seeker recog-

nizes its nature thanks to his own small part of the necessary existence. Further

reading of Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya would produce many more state-

ments of this kind. A picture emerges that is at once emanationist—the Divine

out-pouring that takes various forms through its descent—and ontological. It is

an ontology that recognizes that both the necessary (eternal) and the possible

(temporal) modes of existence are in play at the same time.

Of >Al• Waf å’s writings, his Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya (The Keys to

the Lofty Treasury) is certainly his most sustained discussion of walå ya. His

lengthy comments on sayings from al-Junayd and al-Bas†åm• also serve to

position this work squarely in the sufi tradition.89 However, this is not to say

that Neoplatonism cannot also be of service. For example,>Al• identifies the

Adamic sphere, which the Prophet reached on his mi> r å j, as being equivalent to

the sphere of the Active Intellect.90




In accord with his other writings, the oneness of God and creation is a sig-

nificant element. We are told that although the single real existence is particu-

larized into creation, it maintains its link to its original divine source.

Reality is a single essential existence particularized by its own princi-

ples, which are its attributes and existences (mawj¥d å t ). Creation is

the levels of proportion which are fixed within their limits as immuta-

bles, verified in perceptions (mad å rik ) affected by them . . . As al-

Óaqq said, “Verily, all things We have created in proportion.” (Q.

54:49) But according to the reading of ∂ amma over the lå m of “kull”:

“Verily, We are all the things We have created in proportion.”91

In the same vein, describing the Divine as the Essence of creation, >Al• Waf å’

notes, “It is nothing but Him when the Secret of existence manifests in a par-

ticularity in time.”92 Elsewhere he echoes the image of the Divine as the source

of all existence. We read,

The reality of (the Prophet’s) existence is “I created everything for your

sake, and I created you for my sake” This is the meaning of the root’s

saying to the branch: “You are from me” that is, “You are from me inexistence (wuj¥dan), and I am from you in witnessing (shuh¥dan).” He

who realizes these words has seen the noble Oneness with the eye of

the Lofty, the Great.93

These statements and a number of others in the text not mentioned here all

show clearly >Al• Waf å’ as a proponent of the “Oneness of Being” school. A

number of other topics are dealt with in this work. >Al• Waf å’s commentary on

Abraham having asked God how he gives life to the dead (Q. 2:260) takes theform of twenty-five questions and answers. In this discussion he argues,

among other things, that Abraham was able to adopt the Divine perspective—

along with his human one—within his understanding.94 Elsewhere >Al• com-

ments on the mystical significance of a number of events in the life of Joseph.

I have recently located a work entitled Ó ikam > Al• Waf å ’. The title recalls

Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•’s Ó ikam, a collection of mystical aphorisms, which

would reach an audience far beyond the Shådhiliyya order. In contrast, this

Waf å’ Ó ikam is not mentioned in the biographical sources, nor have I seen

mention of it anywhere else. This manuscript should be looked at more

closely, and at this early stage we can accept its purported authorship only

with caution.95 Also attributed to >Al• Waf å’ is a description of the heavenly

ascensions (ma>å r • j) of the prophets Adam, Idr•s, N¥h, M¥så, >Iså, Ibråh•m,

and Mu˙ammad. A preliminary reading of the manuscript finds, as one might




expect for such a topic of discussion, numerous references to the qißaß al-

anbiyå ’ (tales of the prophets) literature. However, not one of the biographical

sources for>Al

•Waf

å’ mentions this work. Its purported authorship thus calls

for confirmation.96




So far we have described the understanding of sainthood among the spiritual

predecessors of the Waf å’iyya. These may be divided generally into two camps,

that of Tirmidh• / Ibn >Arab•, and that of the early Shådhiliyya. In a summaryway, we can point to Ibn >Arab•’s concept of ‘General prophecy’ (nubuwwa

>å mma) as his pivotal innovation, an innovation that “solved” the problem of

sainthood, as it were, by accounting for the continued spiritual authority of

saints after the final historical revelation of the Qur’an and the ideal model of

the Prophet Mu˙ammad. In Ibn >Arab•’s system, this General prophecy took

the form of two kinds of walå ya, Mu˙ammadan sainthood and General saint-

hood. Mu˙ammadan sainthood was sealed by Ibn >Arab• himself, and Jesus

will seal General sainthood at the end of time. This model allows two things.First, ultimate sainthood may be claimed by Ibn >Arab• as the khatm al-walå ya

al-Mu˙ammadiyya, while a lesser sainthood continues, thus accounting for the

spiritual authority of subsequent saints. The early Shådhiliyya, as we have

noted, presented a somewhat different understanding of walå ya. In short, they

did not develop the idea of nubuwwa >å mma, and their “solution” to the ques-

tion of the continued authority of sainthood was not as tidy. The main thrust of

their doctrine seems to have been to simply extend the functions of prophecy

downward into the realm of sainthood. The saints are thus somehow the exten-

sion of the ended prophetic function. Also an essential component of theirunderstanding of walå ya was its role as a measure of an individual’s spiritual

progress. Important figures have accessed the “greater walå ya,” while the rest

of humanity seeks to develop its “lesser walå ya.” This two-tiered conception is

similar to Tirmidh•’s theory, inasmuch as the latter recognized a superior saint

and an inferior one.

Chapter 5

Sanctity and Mu˙ammad Waf å’



The task at hand for us in this chapter is to explore Mu˙ammad Waf å’s

position within this complex of ideas. Regarding his doctrine of walå ya, it will

be seen that his “solution” was to introduce a cyclical element to the equation.He substitutes Ibn >Arab•’s General prophecy with the idea of tajd • d (renewal).

As we shall see, this model allows Mu˙ammad Waf å’—like Ibn >Arab•—to

claim for himself the ultimate degree of sainthood, but it makes little room for

later manifestations of spiritual authority. This model of walå ya is a substantial

departure from that presented by the early Shådhiliyya.

Before discussing Mu˙ammad Waf å’ on walå ya we must first take stock

of certain supporting elements of his thought. We begin with his understanding

of existence. At the start of the previous chapter we noted Ibn Óajar al-

>Asqalån•’s accusation that the Waf å’s presented an extreme doctrine of mysti-

cal union. The conservative critic based his comments on poetry he had heard

from Mu˙ammad Waf å’. By contrast, our assessment below will take a wider

perspective on his writings.

Absolute Being and Its Self-disclosure

The concept of ‘Absolute Being’ (wuj¥d mu† laq) revolves around the questionof the nature of existence in relation to the divine. In the previous chapter, in

our description of Kit å b al-azal, we noted the “Oneness of Being” perspective

taken up by Mu˙ammad Waf å’. The implications of this viewpoint are signifi-

cant. Seeing God’s existence as the only existence, while a logically tenable

position, was not generally acceptable to the Muslim orthodoxy. The need was

felt, even among a majority of mystical thinkers, to preserve some recogniza-

ble distinction between the Divine and creation. The relationship between the

central Islamic tenet of the Oneness of God (taw˙• d ) and the existential natureof creation became the matter of debate. Beyond the extreme position of those

who would argue for a God immanent in all creation, the dominant understand-

ing in sufism came to be one that recognized both the Absolute Being of God

and a qualified or contingent being for all else.

Certainly the most sophisticated exposition of this oneness of God in rela-

tion to the plurality of creation came from Ibn >Arab•. His position on this,

thanks to his later followers, came to be called “Oneness of Being” (wa˙dat al-

wuj¥d ).1 This doctrine posited first the absolute Being, “for nothing exists

other than God, His attributes and His acts. Everything is Him, is through Him,proceeds from Him, returns to Him; and were He to veil Himself from the uni-

verse even for the space of the blinking of an eye, the universe would straight-

away cease to exist.”2 To this is added the idea of God’s Self-disclosure (tajall• ),

thus providing a mode of existence with apparent independence. This Self-

disclosure must occur through His names and attributes, since Absolute Being




is beyond creation’s ability to comprehend. Ibn >Arab• writes, “God does not

disclose Himself in the name One, and there cannot be Self-disclosure within

it, nor in the name God. But Self-disclosure does occur in the other Names thatare known to us.”3 This Self-disclosure is unlimited in its possibilities, but its

divine origin is concealed by the veils it acquires as it takes particular form.

Only by spiritual insight can any of these existential veils be lifted.

Ibn >Arab•’s teachings on this subject are rather elaborate, but these are the

basic ideas of what we may call his doctrine of the “Oneness of Being.”4 In

light of this explanation, we shall turn our attention to Mu˙ammad Waf å’ in

order to situate him within the discussion of the nature of Divine and created

existence.

There is no shortage of passages in which this Oneness is referred to. We

read, for example, “The essential existence (al-wuj¥d al-dhå t ) is (God) the

Encompassing, since it is the existence of all the existents. It is the [divine

name] “god,” since it is described by the encompassing attributes; through the

connections of wisdom (]dl;üHÔhrguj©hƒ); its name is Allah.”5 Here, as with the

examples of “wa˙dat al-wuj¥d ” we saw in the last chapter, it is important to

note that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ usually follows comments on the absolute being

of God with descriptions of this being’s particularization. Both of these are

present in the passage just cited. Mention is first made of the encompassingnature of God’s existence but this is immediately followed by its particulariza-

tion. The point is that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ at once upholds the concept of a single

absolute existence, but also emphasizes the dynamic relative existence of par-

ticular entities derived from this absolute.

The vehicle for the particularization of this absolute existence—according

to both Mu˙ammad Waf å’ and Ibn >Arab•6—is the dynamic of Self-disclosure

(tajall• ). The Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n describes this process as part of the divine aspect

of Encompassing: “The Encompassing (i˙å† a) is multiplication of the one bySelf-disclosure into various forms, like water as it thickens with cold.”7 These

Self-manifestations take place through a complex process. Mu˙ammad Waf å’

describes necessary existence as the sustainer of the divine Attributes, but adds,

This [existence] Self-discloses upon levels of possibility accord-

ing to the preparedness (VHvujßH) of each level.

Preparedness is the reality (˙aq• qa) of prime matter (]d˚!mdˆ)which subsists in the essence of the possible. This reality is divinely

derived (&Hnjø!HK¬), rather than directly created.The reality of this derivation is the preparation of prime matter

for the accepting of form. This form [the result of existence reaching

preparedness] is directly created.

. . . The reality of its preparedness is the acceptance of the Self-

disclosure of the Necessary.8

Sanctity and Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ 91



Thus the result of Self-disclosure—moving things from the possible into the

necessary—is determined by the particular abilities of the various levels of

prime matter to accept the Self-disclosure of Necessary Being. This ability isessential to (possible) prime matter; in other words, it is not as such part of the

process of divine Self-disclosure.9 The result of the preparedness receiving the

Self-disclosure is the form. What results from this reception is “direct cre-

ation,” a moving into existence according to a form, which itself was deter-

mined by the simply derived (i.e., possible) preparedness.

This Self-disclosure plays a dual role. On the one hand it serves to bring

the Divine nearer to His servants, but on the other, it acts as a veil. In a discus-

sion emphasizing the need of the worshipper to transcend the product of Self-

disclosure, the highest level of forgiveness is that in which one’s derivative

existence is surpassed.

Forgiveness and unbelief are both from the veil (of Self-disclosure);

yet there is a difference between them since unbelief is the hiding of

al-Óaqq by creation, and asking forgiveness is the hiding of creation by

al-Óaqq.10 Asking forgiveness occurs on three levels: [1.] By wearing

down (Ú@ijßH),11 which is asking forgiveness essentially, and which is

that no sign ( n´H) persists for the servant, and there is no notice to behad of his [own] being. [2.] By drowning (‰HnyjßH), which is asking

forgiveness by the attributes, which is that the asker of forgiveness

knows that it is he who has been forgiven. [3.] By being veiled ( NhjjßH),

which is asking forgiveness by the acts, which is that his being in

things is by his Lord, and not by himself.12

Thus “unbelief” is essentially allowing creation to distract from the Divine,

while “forgiveness” is allowing the Divine to distract us from creation. Thethree modes of asking forgiveness then are the levels of existential rapproche-

ment with the absolute Being. The highest level is one at which the servant’s

being is obliterated in his essence. The other levels consist of existential differ-

entiation of the servant from his Lord.

Also, by serving as a link between created beings and God, tajall• pro-

vides potentially limitless knowledge. Human perception (ÚHNVH)—like any

other creation—is the product of a particular reception of Self-disclosure.

Without doubt, perception is the mirror of the unveiling of the

Self-disclosure of knowledge in the known. So in perception mani-

fests the known containing the Self-disclosure, without attaining

quiddity . . .13

Every known thing has a locus which accepts its Self-disclosure

at the time of reception, so its image manifests in [the locus] as the




[locus] is then. It is said of this image, by virtue of this Self-disclosure,

that it is a “possible occurrence.”

So by this, everything from the unseen reality has a position in per-ception able to receive its Self-disclosure by [God’s] determination.14

Thus our knowing a thing consists of our accepting the Self-disclosure that

engenders an image, according to its locus. This image is our understanding.

Although it is the result—at least initially—of a Self-disclosure, it remains only

an impermanent possibility; it is a possibility that is determined by the process

of determination as a particular. This determination is due to the receptive

locus.15 In the last line of the passage it is made clear that all things in the realm

of the unseen truths are potentially subject to becoming a Self-disclosure.

As for Self-disclosure as an active creative principle, the following pas-

sage provides an example of its use specifically from the perspective of the

creation of the intellects and material beings. The technical terms used would

reward closer analysis, but such an exercise will have to wait for another study.

The general message, however, is first that God, through His aspect as the

Encompassing Intellect, moves by tajall• to give rise to form, which itself is

the reception of an absolute. From this form are generated the souls and the

intellects, which are the progenitors of humanity. From there Mu˙ammad Waf å’goes on to restate the creative descent according to a Neoplatonic model. Here

the First Intellect is described as engendering the souls and intellects within the

absolute Soul, or the spiritual world, giving rise to creation in all its varieties.

The passage begins as follows:

When the Essential Will turned towards creating the form of all-

encompassing Knowledge, It originated through Self-disclosure, with

respect to the form of intellected encompassing, absolute receptacles[to receive] the encompassing influences in various particular ways.

That Will gave to the form of knowledge—through its receptacles for

divine origination, in this respect—intellects as fathers and souls as

mothers, like Adam and Eve.

Thus the entity knowledge, through its essential disposition, receives from the

existentiating Will the specifics that are intellects and souls. Within the physi-

cal realm, each of these,

established the form of itself and the multiplications of the individu-

als [constituting] its species within the comprehension of its genus,

like the plants in their morphological differentiation and in their

variety of taste, smell and touch, beyond what the human imagination

may conceive.




Within this existential drama the First Intellect16 gives rise to the absolute prin-

ciple, in this case, of souls and intellects, located in the absolute Soul.17 These

principles function as the “seeds” for each particular subsequently created.

If this is understood, then we say, according to similitude, that the

First Intellect as the first fatherhood originates intellects and souls in

the absolute Soul. Each of these [intellects and souls] is an absolute in

itself, and the encompassing of their species and genera is like the

seed of the plants. If it brings out its branches, leaves and fruit, then

its particular form appears in its very fruit, which is its unique and

ultimate level.

Thus the fruit, or the various things in creation, are in some sense the fulfill-

ment of their principles in the Universal Soul. The passage then moves to the

question of humanity and its variety in intellect and soul. We saw above that

the priciples of intellect and soul are unitary and undifferentiated in the First

Intellect and that the fathers and mothers in the absolute Soul constitute differ-

entiation. Our intellects may share a common source, but they have different

fathers and mothers, representing different predispositions to receiving the cre-

ative Self-disclosure.

When the fruit of the whole is the children of Adam, all of them

[the fruits] are based upon intellect and soul, being the fruit of diver-

sity. And the fathers and mothers which were from the divine Self-

disclosure are the creators and originators. Every tree is [from] a

seed of their fruit, a root of their tree. Thus, the world occurred in

its form with innumerable faces, and inexhaustible [divine] help.

So each intellect judges the world by the form which has occurredin it, like . . . the viewpoints of the creeds and the sects18 according

to the differences of their conceptions.

This is the existential blueprint for God’s progressively differentiated Self-

disclosure, yet also possible is a “perfect intellect” that offers a mystical return

to the unified.

In various spheres and horizons, each [sect] knows its own ßalå t and

praise, but the perfect intellect is the seed of the fruit of the encom-

passing tree of all roots and divisions. Vision does not know this face

[of the perfect intellect], yet it knows all visions. As is said, “Is it not

He who encompasses all things?” (Q. 41:54)19

The world thus occurs in an endless variety, yet the perfect intellect knows

these forms within itself. It knows these forms are not inherent but derived




ultimately from God’s Will. This mystical perspective is possible only within

the existential framework, based on divine Self-disclosure, laid out above.

The Preexistential and the Everlasting

A peculiar set of concepts that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ develops is that of ‘azaliyya’

(preexistence) and ‘abadiyya’ (everlastingness). Although he does not take up

the wider philosophical or theological questions of time in his writings, Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ nevertheless addresses this pair of ideas on more than one occasion.

In one instance, the two are distinguished categorically:

Know that the encompassing Throne is that below which is the

likeness of everything. It has two sides to it: a side of Omnicient-

Merciful-Necessary-Pre-existence (]d˜h¨ ]d˚hlπN ]df“HM ]d©BH), and a side

of All-Hearing-Compassionate-Possible-Everlastingness (]dk;ó ]∂vƒH

]dudlß ]dldπN). The first is by knowledge and the second is by percep-

tion (ÚHNVH).20

These two sides might be awkwardly named, but the essential point is that the

Preexistential is distinct first because it is “necessary,” while the Everlasting is

of the “possible” realm. As is clear from the other adjectives provided, God

“knows” everything before creation, and He “hears” everything in time after

creation. The second side of the Throne, the contingent, is fully within time.

The same kind of temporal/existential distinction is made elsewhere by our

author. We read, “Pre-existence is encompassing in oneness, while Everlasting

is encompassing in plurality . . . The first is by necessity while the second is by

possibility.”21 Preexistence is thus understood to be in the realm of God’s nec-

essary attributes, while Everlastingness is the corollary present as temporalizedindividualization.

In a further elaboration, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ introduces an inverse relation-

ship. He describes each element as a dimension of the other:

What is interior to the Preexistent is what is manifest in the Everlast-

ing; and likewise the opposite. None other than the servant appeared

in the Everlasting, yet his opposite was hidden in him. None other

than a Lord appeared in the Preexistent, while that which was hidden

was the form of the first [i.e. the servant]. Thus, that which appears

because it was hidden, was hidden because it appeared.22

These brief remarks are the extent of the substantive discussion in the sources.

However, there are a few observations we can make. It is clear that the two

aspects, the Preexistent and the Everlasting, function as the necessary and the

possible (or divine and human) realms. The point being made here, however, is




to highlight the link between the two. The created servant appears in the Ever-

lasting created realm, but he is at the same time the possessor of “his opposite.”

This opposite is an existential opposite, a Lordly potential. Likewise, the Lord’sstanding in Preexistence contains within it its opposite, a potential servanthood.

Spiritual Anthropology

For Mu˙ammad Waf å’, the nature of humanity must be understood as at once

having its source in the Divine, yet being a manifestation of one particular

aspect of God: the Name al-Ra˙mån (the Merciful). Like Ibn >Arab•, Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ attributes to Adam a share in the Divine Names. In the Sha>å ’ir al-

> irf å n we are told that in the spiritual realm, before creation of the material

world, Adam was not simply taught the names of things but was himself the

product of Divine Names: “Know that humanity is a collection of the Lordly

Names which were known by Adam in the spiritual realm of Malak ¥t, and

which contain both essential realities and particulars, and thus are the strongest

links (Rªh®N) (to God).”23 Ibn >Arab•, in a different context, also assigns Divine

Names to Adam: “God created Adam upon His own form. Hence He ascribed

to him all His Most Beautiful Names.”24

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ goes on to single out the name al-Ra˙mån as the source

of mankind’s spiritual reality. First, the act of creating is tied to al-Ra˙mån:

“Knowledge and the known, creation and the created, origination (K∂m;∆) and

becoming (m… ); the first pair is [engendered] by God, the second by al-Ra˙mån,

and the third is by al-Óaqq.”25 However, not only is al-Ra˙mån the source of

creation and the created, it is the Divine aspect that is immediately accessible

and linked to mankind. We are told,

God is the unseen of all things, and everything is identical (> aynuhu)

with Him . . . for the absolute Unseen only appears as identical [to

something], either by Self-disclosure or act or likeness or composi-

tion . . . “Your Lord creates and chooses what He wills; they have no

choice in the matter.” (Q. 28:68) But when the lights of the knowledge

of [divine] Presence burn the perceiving sense, it sees the unseen of all

things in its essence [i.e. God]. “Say: None in heaven or on earth

knows the unseen except God.” (Q. 27:65) Humanity is the couch

( nŸ nß) of al-Ra˙mån; in gnosis is the extinction of man and the sub-

sistence of al-Ra˙mån. Al-Ra˙mån is the source (> ayn) of the unseen

of everything.26

Thus, by its faculty of gnosis, humanity may see the unseen. It is by its being

the couch (i.e., the receiver of the divine Self-disclosure) of al-Ra˙mån that




In this passage the initial assertion that the verifier is himself the source of ver-

ification is subsequently shifted to point to the Divine as the ultimate source.

The gnostic is the source of his gnosis inasmuch as it is manifested to himthrough his sincerity in witnessing and love. In other words, it is by the fact

that God may be found in himself that the gnostic or verifier may find his

“own” gnosis and reality. The last sentence of the passage may therefore be

better understood—be it awkward sounding—as “He (the gnostic) is Him, in

as much as He is him.”

Cosmology

The question of how existence, in all its forms, is organized is important to

any mystical or philosophical speculation. The ultimate order of things pro-

vides a structure within which all else must operate. In Mu˙ammad Waf å’s

thinking, however, cosmology is much more than a simple accounting of stars

and spheres; significantly, it includes the human being.

As we saw earlier, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ was no stranger to the Neoplatonic

understanding of the universe, which was headed by the First Intellect, fol-

lowed by an absolute Soul.32 However, this cosmological system was not theone earnestly adopted by him. Instead, he focused on a cosmology that recog-

nized three worlds—the world of omnipotence (Jabar¥t), the world of sover-

eignty (Malak ¥t), and the corporeal world (Mulk). This was not exactly the

system adopted by Ibn >Arab•, since the latter held, in at least one important

discussion, Jabar¥t to be an intermediary world between the worlds of Mulk

and Malak ¥t.33 It is interesting to note, however, that al-Qåshån•’s definitions of

the three worlds, a century later, are in line with those of Mu˙ammad Waf å.34 As

we shall see, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ has a number of ideas play out in his descrip-tions of the cosmos.

All things may be divided between the necessary and the possible. The

first category is engendered by God’s Command, while the second is brought

about by His aspect as Creator.

[1] The Spirit of Command (r ¥˙ al-amr ) is from the treasury of the

world of divine Power (qudra), and in it the unseen of the Necessary

determines itself through Self-disclosure of the beautiful Names and

lofty Attributes. . . and the archangels by the Throne and the Seat and

the Tablet and the Pen . . . [2] The Spirit of Creation (r ¥˙ al-khalq) is

from the treasury of the world of [divine] Wisdom, and by it the bod-

ily forms and spiritual shapes are determined; . . . and these two are

Mulk and Malak ¥t, and the world and the hereafter, and what is in

them of things heard, seen and felt.35




Here Mu˙ammad Waf å’ has divided the cosmos into two, the necessary realm

of God’s Names and Attributes and the realm of possible created beings—

whether seen or unseen. The lower realm consists of Mulk and Malak ¥t, whilethe higher will elsewhere be identified as Jabar¥t. In a brief, but clearer, distinc-

tion between the three worlds, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ writes, “The world of com-

mand, the world of creation, and the world of becoming—these are Jabar¥t,

Mulk and Malak ¥t; charity, faith and submission; the reality of certainty, the

eye of certainty, and the knowledge of certainty; need, poverty and needful-

ness. These three levels are the beginning, the end and the middle.”36 Here the

division of worlds is extended to mirror certain virtues, to distinguish between

modes of spiritual insight. Another brief statement ties the three worlds

directly to specific divine aspects: “The worlds are three: the world of Mulk,

which accepts (Gƒh®) divine Acts only; the world of Malak ¥t, which accepts the

divine Self-disclosures; and the world of Jabar¥t, which accepts the divine Reali-

ties. The first is by Act, the second by Attribute and the third by Essence.”37 The

model here seems in effect to be cumulative. The lowest world, that of Mulk, is

the realm that exists by—or receives—only God’s Act. The Jabar¥t accepts

these Acts and in addition has some kind of access to the divine Attributes and

Essence. In his Kit å b al-azal Mu˙ammad Waf å writes, “Jabar¥t is by the Essence

and Attributes; Malak ¥t is by the Names and the Named; Mulk is by the tenu-ities and the moments.”38 Here the Attributes are placed at the level of the

Essence, with the successive level of Malak ¥t representing the Names and the

Named. That the Attributes have now moved up to the Jabar¥t signals an

inconsistency, and the exact difference between the Names and the Attributes

is not clear, yet the scheme of first an unknowable essence, second a general

particularization, and third the specific entites remains clear.

Elsewhere Mu˙ammad Waf å’ supplies a more detailed account of the worlds,

one that introduces their constituent elements. Of the three worlds,

The first is the world of Jabar¥t which is the divine world, the

second is the Malak ¥t which is the spiritual world, and the third is

Mulk which is the world of formal soul. The first in Jabar¥t is the

divine world, and what reaches it does so at two bows’-length.39 The

second world is that of Malak ¥t which is the world of spirit, and

what reaches it is “gabrielness” acquired through angelic inspiration

descending to the heart. “The sure Spirit came down with it to your

heart.” (Q. 26:193-194) The third is Mulk, which is the world of pil-lars [of the physical world], of the engendered. And what reaches it

is the Jinn, by the righteous Command . . .

The world of Mulk is centered in the body encompassing the four

elements, which are water, fire, earth and wind, from which are born

the minerals, the plants, the animals and the [practical] Reason used




for the lives of people. The world of Malak ¥t is centered in the sepa-

rated Spirit,40 which encompasses the four gems: the intellect, the soul,

the creative faculty, and the commanding Spirit. Present through theseare the Preserved Tablet, the Pen, the Throne and the Seat. The world

of Jabar¥t is self-standing by encompassing the absolute Being, dis-

tinguished by the four [divine] realities: Knowledge, Life, true Exis-

tence and the encompassing Face—[all of which] descended [from

this realm] by the Attribute, the Name, Light and Self-disclosure.41

So the description of the three worlds presents a progression from the most ele-

mental, up to the spritiual substances, finally ascending to the eternal attributes

of the Divine. There is here also an association of specific figures with each

world: the Prophet (by two bows’-length) with Jabar¥t, the angel Gabriel (by

“gabrielness”) in Malak ¥t, and the elemental Jinn with the lower world of Mulk.

The three worlds are also represented by unique kinds of angels. We read of

the “pure illuminated angels and cherubs” of the Jabar¥t; the angels Gabriel,

Michael, Isråf •l, and >Izrå’•l of the spiritual world that is the Malak ¥t; and the

“earthly angels, the souls of the spheres and the knowing messengers” to be

found in the world of the four elements, that is, the world of Mulk.42 In marked

distinction from this angelology, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ elsewhere says, “Gabriel isthe Jabar¥t, the eye of all unseen of the Godhead . . . and Michael is the Malak ¥t,

the eye of all the spiritual, angelic, soulful and immaginal shapes.”43 Thus the

archangels may have a metonymic function, each representing an entire realm.

A particularly interesting element of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s understanding

of the three worlds is his description of the connections between them. In

Peripatetic psychology the five bodily senses are accompanied by a “common

sense” (˙iss mushtarak ), which is the cognitive faculty lying behind the five

senses. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ introduces the latter as the link (barzakh) betweenthe world of Mulk and Malak ¥t. More significantly, he describes a related

link, between Malak ¥t and Jabar¥t, which he calls the “common intellect” (> aql

mushtarak ).44 In a passage describing these links we read,

The possible is divided into the visible (mulk • ) and the invisible

(malak ¥t • ) realms. The visible is divided into six parts: the five senses

and the “common sense.” The invisible is divided into six parts: esti-

mation (]lˆmj¬), imagination, preserving, remembering, reflection and

the “common intellect.” The “common sense” is the link between thevisible and invisible. The “common intellect” is the link between the

invisible and the Jabar¥t.

Know that the five senses, along with the “common sense,” are

the six days in which God made creation. They are known as “days”

because they are the lights of elucidation, the clarification of vague-




ness and the revealing of the unseen. They are the keys to the heavens

and earth.

Thus, seeing (baßar ) is the key to the treasure-house of visiblethings, and their light and elucidation. And [so are] hearing, . . .

smelling, . . . tasting, . . . touching. The “common sense” is all of these

things, their presence and preservation, in the state of the absence of

their original sources.45

Imagination is their treasure-house and the utmost occasion of

their pure form. This is the clear horizon, and the furthest Lote-tree.46

Thus the invisible lights [of the unseen world] are face to face with

these visible lights.

These twelve lights are the realities of the preparedness of the

tablet. All of its levels are accepting of the emanated forms from the

Pen. This is the “rational faculty” (]r≈hk©H mr©H). God has elucidated this

in the transcript that is humanity. So he who knows himself knows his

Lord. He is the throne, under which is found the likeness of all things.47

The definition given here of “common sense” is straightforward. This sense

and that of the “common intellect,” as stated at the end of the quotation, consti-

tute the “rational faculty.” The “common intellect” operates in parallel to“common sense,” at the point between Malak ¥t and Jabar¥t. The “rational fac-

ulty,” according to Ibn S•nå is the hightest part of the soul and receives from

the eternal Active Intellect.48 However, this is not Mu˙ammad Waf å’s final

word on the matter.

Elsewhere, to these two linking senses is added a third, the “choice con-

nection” ( Nhjo¬ xßM). This connection links Jabar¥t (here representing a further

set of abilities) to the absolute Necessary. This set is described not with phil-

sophical terminology, but rather with traditional mystical terms.

There are three worlds: the world of Mulk, which is a place from the

viewpoint of sensation by the five senses. The “common sense” is the

link (barzakh) between the Mulk and Malak ¥t, which is the second

world. This is a place from the viewpoint of the intellect (Gr¨), which

is the five interior senses, like estimation (]ÜlˆM), imagination, preserv-

ing, remembering and thinking. The “common intellect” is the link

between Malak ¥t and Jabar¥t. Jabar¥t is the third world, and is the

place of the five comprehensions49 (Ôh≈hπH): the heart, the fu’å d (heart),

the spirit, the secret, the unseen secret; and the “choice connection” is

the link between the absolute Necessary and Jabar¥t. This “choice

connection” is the Throne of al-Ra˙mån, hidden in it by Omnipotence

and appearing from it by Self-disclosure; and it acts without restric-

tion by choice because absolute Necessity effuses from the Essence.50




Thus the “common intellect” is the cognitive faculty behind the senses, leading

to the world of Jabar¥t. This Jabar¥t itself is then linked to the Divine by the

“choice connection”—another term Mu˙ammad Waf å’ appears to have coined.This connection is equated with the function of the Throne of Mercy, although

in the previous quotation it appears at a lower level. It is noteworthy that the

proviso is made that it “acts without restriction and by choice.” This is proba-

bly a nod to the Qur’anic vision of God as unfettered and omnipotent, as dis-

tinct from the philosophical vision that often denied God any choice in the

matter of emanation. Perhaps more interesting though is this term choice con-

nection. In the previous quotation we met the “rational faculty,” which seemed

to be the highest human point; yet here the “choice connection,” located beyond

a further set of (mystical) senses, seems to represent that point. This connection

functions much as the > aql quds• did for Ibn S•nå, an intelligence that is described

as having ready access to the Active Intellect.51 Significantly, Mu˙ammad Waf å’s

formulation presents a dimension beyond the Neoplatonic “rational soul.” This

development (which is more anthropological than it is cosmological) shows us

where Mu˙ammad Waf å’s true intellectual allegiance lies. That is, he is above

all a mystical writer, and thus the highest human dimensions are described

using sufi terminology. It would be fair to conclude that Mu˙ammad Waf å’

uses philosophical models and language as far as they may be of service to himin presenting his own mystical vision.52

Thus this “cosmology” is not a physical model of the universe. For Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ the structure of existence may be made sense of in a number of dis-

tinct ways. We saw earlier in this section that the lower worlds represent possible

existence, while the upper represents necessary existence. This is a philosophi-

cal perspective, yet we also saw a theological one. There Jabar¥t was associated

with God’s Realities and Essence, with Malak ¥t presenting God’s Attributes,

and Mulk the divine Acts. We were elsewhere presented with a rather linearprespective that simply presented the lowest world as the material realm, the

median as spiritual realm, and the higher as the divine realm.

In an alternate model of cosmology, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ describes a universe,

each part of which has its own ruler. The focus of this model is, however, the

human form that becomes a microcosm of the larger cosmology. We are told,

The world is divided into two: the world of spirits (∏HMNH) and the world

of bodies. Then it is divided into four branches: spirits of prophethood,

angelic spirits (]d;g¬ ∏HMNH), spirits of jinn, and the Adamic forms. The

First Intellect is the father of the spirits of prophethood, like Adam is

the father of the human forms (∏hfå!H mƒH), and likewise Gabriel53 is

the father of the angelic spirits, like Ibl•s (Satan) is the father of the

Jinn spirits. All that is of human form has a prophetic spiritual form

manifesting to it and rising from it, commanding it and forbidding it,




inspiring it, improving it and making it pious. To each Adamic form

there are two associates (K∂n®), one is angelic and the other jinn-like.

These two struggle, and if the angelic triumphs over the jinn-like,then clearness is established in the water by the falling of the sediment,

and the commanding prophetic spirit rises, and its image appears in

him/it by manifestation—like the shape of the seer appears in a mir-

ror. If it conquers the jinn, then its affinity is close to the angelic, but

if it is far, then it is Satanic, and muddiness prevails. Sight is then

veiled and communication is cut, for “He to whom God does not give

light, has none.” (Q.24:40) This Commanding Spirit is that which will

settle the account of the servant on Judgement Day, and will reward

him according to his acts, since, “Your soul suffices to make an account

against you.” (Q.17:14). He who knows himself, knows his Lord.54

This model—which is perhaps as soteriological as it is cosmological—has as

its ultimate concern the fate of each “Adamic form,” that is, the individual

soul. In this system the First Intellect engenders the spirits of prophecy, which

function as warners and moral aids to the soul. Despite this help, the soul

becomes the battleground for the forces of Satan and those of Gabriel. The

final lines of this passage, evoking the image of one’s own soul standing as wit-ness, provide a novel perspective on the oft-repeated hadith “He who knows

himself knows his Lord.” The implication is that if one wants to know God the

keeper-of-accounts, one need only know oneself.

The Teaching Shaykh and Beyond

From our discussion earlier in chapter 3, it is clear that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ssaintly persona was well established. His position as a “teaching shaykh,” that

is, as a master who teaches mystical theory to his followers (shaykh al-ta> l• m),

is evident from his voluminous writings. As we have noted, however, Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ himself did not place much emphasis on the pedagogical role of the

shaykh as spiritual guide (shaykh al-tarbiyya).55 Instead he seems to have nur-

tured for himself an inspired and mysterious image, one that did not much care

for the psychology of spiritual direction. Nevertheless, help for the aspirant on

the sufi way is not wholly absent in his writings. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ was after all

striking out from the Shådhiliyya on an independent course, which necessitated

at least some attention to the development of aspirants. In the previous chapter

we mentioned the short work by Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Maqå må t al-saniyya li al-

så da al-ß¥ fiyya (The Sublime Stations of the Sufis). There we saw that this work

presents short definitions of mystical vocabulary followed by cursory elabora-

tions. The tone and form suggest this is a pedagogical text, a kind of manual




intended for the novice. However, this kind of writing within the oeuvre of

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ is a remarkable exception. The composition in question cov-

ers only nine of the approximately three hundred folios his writings occupy.Yet this is not to say that all of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s writing is philosophi-

cal and abstract. At the beginning of the Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n the reader is pro-

vided with basic definitions of a number of mystical terms:

Servanthood fixes the command of Lordship. Oneness is the last level

of with-ness (]Üu¬) . . . Humility is the quieting of the soul along the

paths of pre-existence . . . Asceticism is leaving all things (G;©H Ún∆) . . .

Courtesy (adab) is standing in the provisions of the moment. Cer-

tainty is the absence of indecision. Remembrance (dhikr ) is the sum-

moning of the remembered . . . Perspicacity (]ßHn†) is the extraction of

the unseen from the seen. Extinction is consuming everything in God.

Persistence is the fixing of everything by God.56

Beyond these rudimentary pronouncements, we do find other passages that

treat some of the basic distinctions of which an aspirant should be made aware.

In the following, the categories of spiritual men are described.

For the ascetics, their sciences are embodied in their acts. For the sufis,

their sciences are embodied in their states. For the gnostics, their acts

are embodied in their gnosis. For the verifiers, their states are embodied

in their realities. Thus the ascetics find what they know by what they

do; and the sufis find what they verify by the traits they assume;57 and

the gnostics find what they do by what they know; and the verifiers find

what they assume as traits by that which they are verified of.58

The distinctions being made here are rather straightforward, adhering to a spir-

itual hierarchy that privileges realities (˙aqå ’iq) and gnosis over temporary

states and acts. In the same line of discussion—that of the basic categories of

mystics—Mu˙ammad Waf å’ elsewhere writes,

The face of the gnostic is a mirror of the Self-disclosures of known

Attributes. The verifier is the model of what is verified to him. And the

sufi has assumed the traits, which are attributed to the object of his

desire in sanctification. Union is the source of his perfection, occurring

only with the melting together of opposites, which is impossible nor-

mally and conceptually.59

These discussions of categories are rather brief, and they are noticeably miss-

ing the expected advice as to how the novice is to make headway on the spiri-

tual path. It seems that Mu˙ammad Waf å’s advice, on this level, is restricted to




making observations such as, “The knower (L ©h¨) realizes al-Óaqq from the

side of creation, but the gnostic (ˇNh¨) realizes creation from the side of al-

Óaqq.”60

The apparent lack of concern exhibited for the spiritual advancementof lowly aspirants is striking—especially from the perspective of a hopeful

founder of a new sufi order.

However the case may appear, we should not be surprised that Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ has some interesting speculations on the deeper mystical aspects of

the subject. He characterizes the relationship between the spiritual aspirant and

the master as one of existential union. This union even comes to mirror that

between the servant and God. To start with, he ties together the essence of the

aspirant, his spiritual guide and his Lord.

He who has no teacher, has no protector; and to him who has no

protector Satan draws near.61

He who knows himself knows his shaykh.

He who has not found his shaykh has not found his heart,

and he who has not found his heart has lost his Lord.62

The details of the presence and function of the shaykh are also described. This

relationship is rather mysterious but seems to center on the attributes of theshaykh. The description runs as follows,

Your shaykh is he who causes you to hear when he is silent. He

makes you oblivious when he speaks. He causes you to be lost when

he finds [God in ecstasy]; and he causes you to find [God] when he is

silent. Your shaykh is he who informs you by his speech, and he veri-

fies you by his [spiritual] state, and he establishes you by his vanish-

ing, and effaces you by his perfection.63

The point that the aspirant is existentially linked to the attributes of the shaykh

is clear. Elsewhere, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ describes this relationship as extending

beyond the visible world. We read, “The heart of the aspirant is the house of

his teacher, and his body is his grave in which he is buried, and from which he

rises.”64 This image is further developed by Mu˙ammad Waf å’ when he con-

cludes, “He who has no son is not remembered.” The gist of the images is that

the timeless unseen spiritual presence of the shaykh is to be found in the heart

of his follower.65 The connection between aspirant and shaykh is also explainedin the context of the “Oneness of Being” insight. We encountered a passage

earlier that is worth repeating here:

If you know your teacher and imam—guiding you by his necessary

divine existence, then you know your Lord, al-Óaqq. Do you know

who He is? He is simply the source of your divine existence, as




determined for you on the level of distinction of your being, by which

you see that you have no existence except Him (*Hmß :© m… !).66

Thus the guide, by his own share in necessary existence, is to his follower the

divine Presence. An individual may find the Divine in himself, but also, and

perhaps more easily, it may be accessed in certain others. It is also made clear

that knowing al-Óaqq in the teacher is a specific insight, which hinges on ones

seeing that there is no real existence except in God.

In an even more dramatic formulation of the relationship of the aspirant

with his guide, Mu˙ammad Waf å’ describes the former as a kind of manifesta-

tion of the latter. In one brief statement the follower is identified with the cre-

ative “mercy” of his master. We read, “The heart of the aspirant is a throne for

the ra˙må niyya (mercifulness) of his teacher to sit upon.”67 As we noted earlier

in this chapter, the creative impulse of the Divine is associated with its name

al-Ra˙må n (the merciful); here that function is being transferred through the

teacher. This transference is repeated at a lower level by other statements

describing the aspirant as a kind of mouthpiece for communication of the

insights of the shaykh. One such passage runs: “The sincere aspirant is the elo-

quent pulpit (R≈h˚nfk¬) whom the teacher climbs after his divesting himself of

the physical worlds (L söHL ©Hm¨). He informs, by his sincere tongue, of what hehas witnessed of the realities.”68 From this it is clear that the follower becomes

a medium for use by the spiritually elevated (or deceased?) shaykh. Further, it

seems this follower must himself have first achieved a purifying spiritual

insight. The passage ends by stating that this follower’s task is then to broad-

cast what has been communicated to him.69

It would be fair to say that Mu˙ammad Waf å’s thinking on the “guiding

shaykh,” and advice to novices in general, is rudimentary, and does not hold

our author’s attention. Yet the idea of the spiritual function of the shaykh, andthe aspirant’s relationship to him, received substantial reflection. It should be

no surprise to find Mu˙ammad Waf å’ at some point referring the question back

to the imanent existential divine Reality of creation. In this context the shaykh

serves as simply one of a number of possible divine Self-disclosures. Thus, to

know the shaykh is to know the Lord. More intriguingly perhaps, Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ also describes the transference of spiritual insight from the shaykh to the

aspirant and emphasizes the latter’s central function as an inheritor, as it were,

and as a transmitter.

The Mu˙ammadan Reality and the Pole

Central to the philosophy of Ibn >Arab• was the existential position of the prophet

Mu˙ammad. In his cosmic function, the Prophet operated essentially as the First




Intellect, that is, the first in creation, from which all else is derived. Ibn >Arab•

himself equates this First Intellect with the Mu˙ammadan Reality (˙aq• qa

Mu˙ammadiyya).70

In a brief definition of this term, al-Qåshån• tells us, “TheMu˙ammadan Reality is the Essence in its primary individuation,71 for it con-

tains all of the Beautiful Names and is itself the Greatest Name.”72 Mu˙ammad

Waf å’, in his own writings, does not deal with the term ˙aq• qa Mu˙ammadiyya

directly; however, he does seem to apply the equivalent concept to his own per-

son. He recounts: “Al-Óaqq said to me, ‘You are the elite, to you is the measure

( NHvr¬) of all things, yet you have none with Me; for none contains Me other than

you, since there is nothing like you. You are the source of My Truth [in creation]

and everything is a metaphor ( Bh[¬) for you. I am present in the truth and absent

in the metaphor’.”73 It is clear from this that Mu˙ammad Waf å’s understanding

of his own spiritual authority accorded him an exceptional position. Just as the

Mu˙ammadan Reality functions as the “primary individuation,” so this elite fig-

ure is at once distinct from, yet the source of, all creation.

Tied to the idea of the Mu˙ammadan Reality, for Ibn >Arab•, is the concept

of the ‘perfect human being’ (inså n k å mil). The difference between the two

figures of the perfect human and the Mu˙ammadan Reality is often hard to dis-

tinguish, since they perform the same intermediary function between God and

creation.74 Al-Qåshån• describes the perfect human being as the realization of the Divine in creation. He defines the “Divine Form” as, “The perfect human

being, who has verified the realities of the Divine Names.”75 This description

points to the central role of this figure in the generation of the created entities,

which are the realities. Elsewhere al-Qåshån• describes the perfect human as

the intermediate realm (barzakh) between the necessary and the possible, that

is, between the Divine and creation.76 In a dramatic account of the created

world, Ibn >Arab• touches on the centrality of this perfect human being. He

compares the rational soul’s function within an individual to the role played bythe perfect human in the cosmos. We read,

The angels in respect to the whole cosmos are like the forms manifest

within man’s imagination, as also are the jinn. So the cosmos is a

great human being only through the existence (wuj¥d ) of the perfect

human being, who is its rationally speaking soul. In the same way the

configuration of the human being is a human being only through the

rationally speaking soul . . . The soul of the cosmos, who is

Mu˙ammad, achieves the degree of perfection through the comple-tion of the divine form . . . and in the subsistence of the cosmos

through him.77

In this image, Mu˙ammad is the soul, the essential reality, of the body that is

creation. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ does not take up the same imagery, but not sur-




prisingly, he does echo Ibn >Arab•’s understanding of the perfect human being.

From the Naf å ’is al-> irf å n we read,

That which is described by the Attributes of the Essence is the Great-

est Name in the horizon of the Beautiful Names. It is the loftiest like-

ness in the world of Jabar¥t, the prior (Rƒhß) and the eternal (Ò mÜ®) inthe world of Awe. It is the encompassing spirit in the world of com-

mand, which is the holy Spirit in the world of Malak ¥t and the origi-

nating (UœHM) reality in the world of creation. The perfect human being

is the effuser of forms ( Nmw©H ŒhÜ†) in the world of becoming. “And to

Him all matters return.” (Q. 11:123)78

In this passage Mu˙ammad Waf å’ begins by pointing to the zenith of the

unseen, the Greatest Name. This Name includes, and is somehow a reflection

of, the named entities at lower levels. To this creative cosmic scenario—one

we have discussed above—is added the perfect human, who is the provider of

the forms that will receive the divine creative Command. In this sense, every-

thing is to be understood as returning to God.

In chapter 1, during our discussion of Ibn >Arab•’s d • wå n, we saw that the

supreme figure of the saintly hierarchy was the pole (qu† b). To this figure isattributed an unsurpassed role in the cosmos, being the temporal embodiment

of the spirit of Mu˙ammad (r ¥˙ Mu˙ammad ).79 In the writings of Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ the hierarchy of saints does not receive a great deal of attention. The dis-

cussions of the pole show that our author assumes a prior familiarity with the

d • wå n as understood by Ibn >Arab•. Shaykh Waf å’s presentation of the pole is

comparatively rudimentary, simply stressing this figure’s role as a locus of

divine Effusion. To start with, we are told that the pole, along with other elite

figures of the hierarchy, are found in God. We read,

In the Name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate. “There is noth-

ing like Him; He is the All-hearing and the All-seeing” (Q. 42:11). In

Him are the pole, the imam, the sucour (ghawth), the solitary ( fard ),

the khalifa, and the verifier (mu˙aqqiq). Those beneath, like the pegs

(awt å d ) and the substitutes (abd å l), the nobles (nujabå ’ ) and others,

exceed in numbers, and they persist in secrets.80

No substantial discussion is provided of these lesser figures. Rather the focusbecomes the pole. We are told later in the Naf å ’is al-> irf å n that the qu† b is the

vehicle for God’s creation and command:

The heart of the pole is the Greatest Name of God; and His Face is

His most noble Essence, by which is established creation and [divine]




Command, and it [the heart of the pole] is the axis of the secret and

notoriety. “And all of the hearts of humanity are between two of His

fingers, like one heart.”81

They are His speaking tongues and Histruthful words and His rending and repairing pens.82

Thus the Face of God is extended into creation and Command takes, in its

loftiest form, the shape of the heart of the pole. (As was noted above, the

Greatest Name may be equated with the Mu˙ammadan Reality.) This point is

recast by Mu˙ammad Waf å’ in terms that draw a striking picture of the pole as

the agent of divine effusion. We read,

The pole is a substitute (badal) for the name “Allåh”; he is the pre-

server (KlÜi¬) of the names of descent, like the Name of God is the

Preserver (KlÜi¬) of the names of the Sublime. And as God has ninety-

nine names, likewise the pole has ninety-nine names. Every one of his

names is the eye of His Unseen and the apparent of His Hidden, and the

Face of his Essence, and the Self-disclosure of His Names and Attrib-

utes. So he who knows him knows God’s Presence, but to he who

denies him [we say]: “There is no power or strength except in God.”83

The parallel between God as the Preserver and the pole as preserver is not

developed in the manuscript beyond this statement, but the implication is that

God’s ninety-nine Names are somehow mirrored by the pole’s ninety-nine

names. The last sentence in the passage ties knowing “him,” the pole, to know-

ing the divine Presence.

From these brief treatments of the pole and his associates, we see that the

function of the Mu˙ammadan Reality is born by either the perfect human

being or the pole. As we noted, the pole has ninety-nine names by which hepreserves creation, and the perfect human is he by whom these forms are

effused. The figure of pole will reappear in the following section on walå ya.

Sanctity, the Renewer, and the Seal

In earlier chapters we explored the parameters of the idea of sainthood accord-

ing to Tirmidh•, Ibn >Arab• and the early Shådhiliyya. It is with these models in

mind, along with the observations above on various mystical figures, that we

now move forward to consider Mu˙ammad Waf å’s teaching on walå ya. One of

the first things to be noted here is the absence of a fully self-consistent doc-

trine. In the teachings of earlier figures we have been able to sketch the outline

of a doctrine, but in the writings of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ things are not so tidy. In

fact, there seem to be three different treatments of walå ya. The first we may




call the more “traditional” treatment, reflecting the simple position of the saint

as closer to the divine source than others (what was described as qurba in the

early Shådhiliyya). In the second type of discussion Mu˙ammad Waf å’ pres-ents a walå ya that more closely follows Ibn >Arab•’s positions on the superior-

ity of prophethood over sainthood, and the (perhaps awkward) case for the

reverse. The third kind of discussion of sainthood is one that contains an ele-

ment of the apocalyptic. Here Mu˙ammad Waf å’ introduces the idea of the

“Renewer of religion at the start of each century” (tajd • d ) into his doctrine of

walå ya, and hints at his own central role in the approaching apocalyptic drama.

The most elementary treatment of walå ya according to Mu˙ammad Waf å’

may be found in statements like the following, “The prophets are the risings of

the Truth (˙aqq), and the saints are the settings of the secrets of Reality

(˙aq• qa), the sources (> uy¥n) of His Mercy, and the unseen of Divinity.”84 This

contrasting of the clear role of the prophet with the hidden secrets represented

by the saint is rather straightforward. In the Kit å b al-azal we are provided with

definitions of saint and sainthood that may also be considered basic. In a sec-

tion entitled “On the Realization of the Circle of the Saint” we read,

Walå ya: The special shared responsibility in the Essence, neces-

sitating vision and elect governing.Wal• : He who is entrusted with the command of his patron, and is

entrusted with his own command, because it is wholly from it [i.e. the

patron’s command].

Comment: The special wal• is the face of the Essence, which

visions do not perceive; and to him turn the faces from every side;

and with him all the utmost degrees are reached.85

Thus sainthood itself includes an essential rapprochement, which entails mys-tical vision and authority. This may be understood as a short description of the

positive content of sainthood. Following this, the notice of the saint as the

medium for God’s command recalls the hadith in which God says of the elect

servant, “If I love him I am his hearing by which he hears and his sight by

which he sees.”86 Mu˙ammad Waf å’s final comment adds a dimension that is

roughly equivalent to the walå ya kubr å we saw earlier in the Shådhiliyya. In

this dimension the special saint plays a mediating role between the Divine and

creation.

A basic distinction between walå ya and riså la is also presented, which

serves to underline the view that sanctity is the improvement of an individual,

while prophecy and mission are offices dispensed by God to appropriate people.

Note the categorical distinction being made in the following passage:

Riså la (mission) occurs by descent from the presence of necessity to

the presence of possibility, as “The Faithful Spirit came down to your




[Mu˙ammad’s] heart.” (Q. 26:193–194). Walå ya is ascension from

the presence of possibility to the presence of necessity by the sign of

“Praise Him who took his servant on a night-journey” (Q. 17:1); forGod sent down a message to the servant, and the servant ascended to

his Lord in walå ya.87

The distinction presented here is one that juxtaposes the downward movement

of riså la with the upward rise of walå ya. Each movement may stand on its

own as a definition, but the two may be connected—at least according to this

statement. The reference to a “night-journey” recalls the event of the Prophet’s

having been raised through the heavens to God’s presence. This example

includes both the element of the chosen prophet and the rising saint. This is

followed by the final line, stating that God sent down, while the servant rose

upwards. The walå ya presented in the above quotation, when viewed on its

own, also clearly reflects the early Shådhiliyya notion of walå ya kubr å .

Elsewhere, this walå ya kubr å reappears, but with an elevated status

approaching that of the Mu˙ammadan Reality. In the Naf å ’is al-> irf å n one

lengthy passage opens with a description of the generation of existences by the

absolute Intellect and the Spirit of Command. It goes on to trace the descent of

the Secret of Grace through revelation (wa y) into humanity. The pivotalimportance of the Prophet’s night journey is asserted:

When he travelled by night to Him within two bow’s-length, “and He

inspired him” (Q.53:10) with existential knowledge, [his] pre-exis-

tence was enroled in his everlastingness, and his singleness was hid-

den within His oneness (*vπH), and all the monads (VhπÓ ) were turned

away from the single (vπHM) by the One (vπH); and so the tongue of

walå ya kubr å recited: “He is the One God, the Eternal not begotten.”(Q. 112:1–4)88

This passage is dense to the point of obscurity, and the manuscript copies do

not inspire confidence. However, we can make some observations. The one-

ness of God is certainly the gist of the communication to Mu˙ammad, but the

more significant point for our discussion is the use of the phrase “tongue of

walå ya kubr å ” in reference to the Prophet.89 This description fits well into the

model of the special saint, as described above. This same passage goes on to

speak of Mu˙ammad’s prophetic function and to describe his state as the Sealof sainthoods: “The human secret (]Ü˚hs˚H n∂nß) and the silent reality (]rÜrπ

]Ü∆m;ß)90 appear in every secret, and are included in every knowledge which has

neither been known nor taught until the Seal of sainthoods; and the fixing of all

the tidings are deposited in trust with him; and faces turn to him from all

directions.”91 Here the Seal of sainthoods seems to function as the Mu˙am-

madan Reality; that is, he is the central figure in the realization of the secrets




and realities hidden in all knowledge. Distinct from the Mu˙ammadan Reality,

however, this portrait of the Seal of sainthoods emphasizes his role in esoteric

knowledge over his role in the dynamic of creation. Further along in this pas-sage we also find reference to a “Kha∂ir-ian” sainthood, which is established,

along with prophecy, among the Jews ( Isr å ’iliyya) by the hidden Spirit.

Quite a distinct discussion of walå ya is presented when Mu˙ammad Waf å’

takes up the issue of ranking among mission, prophethood, and sainthood.

Here we can see clearly our author functioning as the inheritor of Ibn >Arab•.

As we saw in chapter 1, Ibn >Arab• made the innovative claim that prophet-

hood and mission are superior to walå ya, when they are present in different

people, but walå ya is superior to the other two when they coexist within one

individual. The logical difficulty in sustaining this position aside, for our pur-

poses the significance is that it reappears as an important element of Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’s teaching. We note first a description of two orders, that of “sciences

of presence” and that of “religious sciences,” each of which provides a differ-

ent perspective on the three entities riså la, nubuwwa, and walå ya.

Know that polehood is of two kinds: polehood in the sciences of pres-

ence (]Ü˚v© Ò mg¨), and polehood of the religious sciences (]Ük∂V Ò mg¨). The

difference between the two is that the first occurs by the instructingsciences (]Üt∂nu∆ Ò mg¨) and the latter by the commanding sciences

(]ÜtÜg;∆ Ò mg¨). Each one divides into three levels, walå ya, nubuwwa,

and riså la; but in the [sciences] of presence, the [order] is reversed

because the first in the religious [sciences] is he who befriends God

by [following] His commands, and His prohibitions. Yet, in the [sci-

ences] of presence the saint is he whom God befriends, whether it be

by the Essence, “If I love him I am him,”92 or it be by the Attributes,

“If I love him I am his hearing by which he hears and his sight bywhich he sees,” or it be by the Acts, “Do what you will, you are for-

given.”93 The union between all these [aspects] is an unattainable per-

fection (ÚNv∂ ! ˝hl… ). The prophethood of presence and the religious

mission move in the depths of spirituality at the level of Majesty with

the movement of He-ness. And God knows well the secrets of the

hearts. If this is understood, then [so is] the difference between the

M¥sawiyya and the Kha∂iriyya.94

Thus are presented two distinct perspectives: one mystical (Kha∂ir-ian), andone exoteric or literal (Moses-ian).95 The height of the first perspective is

walå ya, because it is the saint who is befriended by God essentially, by

Attribute and by Act. This priority is reversed in favor of the messenger when

the second perspective is adopted. This perspective values more highly he who

follows God’s exoteric commands and prohibitions. The comparison of the




“prophethood of presence” and the “religious mission” among spirituality,

with Majesty among He-ness seems to be an effort to underline their impor-

tance as the visible face of their perspectives in the realm of spirituality. Inother words, nubuwwa laduniyya functions as a name or attribute that serves to

conceal its essence in the realm of spirituality; the same function is in effect for

riså la d • niyya.96 Although it is not clear what we are supposed to make of the

“spirituality” mentioned, it is certain that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ wants to under-

score the Magisterial function of nubuwwa laduniyya and riså la d • niyya. This

function is characterized by an authority that veils an intimate hidden interior.

Thus in the realm of spirituality, we are perhaps to understand the nubuwwa

laduniyya as specifically an external figure in the spiritual realm (as opposed

to the essential walå ya ), and the riså la d • niyya as authoritative reality, superior

to walå ya from the exoteric perspective, even in the domain of spirit. However

we read the details of the passage above,97 the essential point is that this discus-

sion is an effort to recognize the differences between the esoteric and exoteric

conceptions, without subordinating one perspective to the other. The union of

these two perspectives, after all, is a heretofore “unattainable perfection.”

This two-sided model is elsewhere taken up with the distinction being made

between exoteric walå ya and esoteric walå ya. Again, sainthood, prophecy, and

mission are to be found in reverse priority. We are told,

Walå ya has an interior and an exterior. Its external is the enabling of

the servant to befriend God, to obey His command and His proscrip-

tions, and to follow His Wish (|∆hœn¬). Prophethood is above the level

(]“NV) of walå ya, and riså la is above this. God selects the prophets for

information about, and acquaintance with, the things of the unseen

and that which is unveiled of the Malak ¥t. Also, God has helped the

messengers by the descent of the Holy Spirit and the aid in wisdomand power to call [people] to God, and the evidentiary miracles

(mu> jizå t ), and the external proofs, etc. But as for walå ya bå† ina, it is

that by which God befriends His servant in his essence, and informs

him about Himself, concerning the hidden of His Names and Attrib-

utes. He places him in the sacred domain of His Self-disclosure. He

takes him from himself and extinguishes him from himself and makes

him persist in Him, so he is not him, but only Him. This walå ya is

what Mu˙ammad ascended to when Gabriel left him at the furthest

Lote-tree; He was through it [walå ya] at a distance of “two bows’-

length or closer.” Prophethood, from this perspective, is below (MV)

the station (maqå m) of his walå ya, and riså la is below the station of

his nubuwwa. And walå ya, nubuwwa and riså la are in the world of

power (qudra), by this Rule, according to this hierarchy (FÜ∆n∆); the

first is by existence, while the second is in potential.98




seems unlikely that this Seal of sainthoods is a synonym for the Mu˙ammadan

Reality. Thus the field of candidates for Sealhood is narrowed down to Ibn

>Arab• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’ himself. Since Ibn >Arab• is never mentioned inthe writings of Mu˙ammad Waf å’, it would be willful to insist that he is the

unnamed Seal. Discussions elsewhere will point instead to Mu˙ammad Waf å’.

The hadith of the “Renewer of religion” appearing every century itself

reappears on a number of occasions in Mu˙ammad Waf å’s writings. In the fol-

lowing he not only cites the hadith, but he also adds to it:

“God causes to appear at the start of every century a man by whom

He renews this [Islamic] religion.”102 This is the believer whose heart

has embraced Reality through a gnosis of which all else is incapable.

“My earth and My heaven do not embrace Me, but the heart of My

believing servant does embrace Me”103 . . . And he belongs to both the

most important shaykhs of his time and the nobles of his era. And

with this appearance at the start of each century, each one [of these

Renewers] has in his time seventy-thousand guiding signs (Ò@¨H) and

rising lights of emulation. By this is understood the secret of the

Seven oft-repeated.104 “Truly God has seventy-thousand veils of light

and darkness.”105

Here the Renewer is described as being chosen from among the important fig-

ures of his time. One particular benefit of his appearance is an understanding

of the Seven oft-repeated, in other words, revelation. According to the claim of

the first hadith noted, a renewer will appear each century. Since our author was

born at the start of the eighth century Hijr•, there would have been seven or

eight of these Renewers to appear.

For Mu˙ammad Waf å’ the number seven recurs, being completed by aneighth. In the following passage he sets up groups of seven (e.g., Attributes,

prophets, centuries) to be sealed by an eighth. We are told that,

When there were seven days, God struck a similitude of the Seven oft-

repeated which are the Self-disclosures of the Attributes of the Essence.

These are Life, Knowledge, Power, Will, Hearing, Seeing and Speak-

ing. Then [He struck] the great Qur’ån and the Self-disclosure of the

Essence, to which refer all the Names and Attributes. Then the eight

throne-bearers descended . . . to the seven heavenly received com-mands . . . and descended in [the missions of] Adam, Noah, Abraham,

Moses, David, Sulaiman and Jesus. [The throne-bearers] then appeared

in Mu˙ammad, and he is their “day of Assembly”106 and the arrange-

ment of their affair. Then they turned towards the umm• community

and the A˙mad• milla,107 by virtue of the tradition, “God dispatches at




the start of every century a man by whom He renews the religion of

this community.” This is the reality of the polehood, up to [the year]

800. The uniting eighth appears as . . . the seal of the Seven oft-repeated, the organizer of their realities among both concrete and

abstract things, from the umm• community and the Mu˙ammadan

A˙mad• milla. [This unifying eighth, being himself] the great Qur’ån,

[is] known as “In the Name of God the Merciful, the Compassion-

ate.” And “this is the Day of Assembly of which there is no doubt”

(Q. 42:7) or denial. “This is the day for which mankind is gathered

together. That will be a day of Testimony.” (Q. 11:103)108

This passage is rather dense, but the theme of the completing eighth is evident.

First the Seven oft-repeated gives rise to seven divine Attributes, to which is

added the great Qur’an.109 Then the eight throne bearers descend to the seven

prophets.110 This descent is completed by their reaching Mu˙ammad, who

marks their end as the “day of Assembly” marks the day of Judgment for

humanity. At this point Mu˙ammad Waf å’ introduces the hadith of the Renewer

of religion. He states that polehood in this era—up to the year 800—will be a

completion of the Seven oft-repeated. The next line strikingly identifies the

Seal as the great Qur’an (symbolized as: In the Name of God the Merciful, theCompassionate).111 In this passage the entity of the Seven oft-repeated (usually

understood as the Fåti˙a) functions as a principle of divine Self-disclosure.

This Self-disclosure, in the form of the throne bearers (who are to be under-

stood symbolically as the Seven “bearing” the Attributes of the Essence) awaits

this seal. Mu˙ammad completes the seven prophets, a notice of his role as Seal

of the prophets. The Seal of the Seven oft-repeated is an unnamed figure pres-

ent at the year 800.112 Although the figure promised in the hadith is simply a

Renewer, according to Mu˙ammad Waf å’s calculations, the cycles are about toreach their final stage.

This cyclical Renewer of religion appears elsewhere, conveying much the

same finality. We are told that the Prophet is the union of all prophetic tidings.

This function is compared to the final Renewer, who is the abode of the Great

Tiding. The text runs,

The abode of each tiding:113 Since what is announced is fixed, then

Noah is the abode of what Adam announced; and Abraham is the

abode of what Noah announced; and Moses is the abode of what

Abraham announced; and Jesus is the abode of what Moses

announced; but Mu˙ammad is the abode of them all. Likewise the

men dispatched at the start of each century, who are the abodes of the

Mu˙ammadan tidings. The master of the eighth time is the Seal of the

age, and the source of total union, the abode of the Great Tiding (cf.




Q. 38:67), which is called “In the Name of God the Merciful, the

Compassionate.”114

Here is set up a continuum from Adam, down through the prophets, to the Seal,

who is the Word of revelation. Again Mu˙ammad is the completion of prophet-

hood.115 Further down the chain are the Renewers, who as the “abodes of the

Mu˙ammadan tidings” clearly function as the great saints. The final, and

eighth, master is the Seal, who is identified as the abode of revelation. Distinct

from Ibn >Arab•’s doctrine of walå ya, which posits a general and a Mu˙am-

madan Sainthood, this system presents three tiers (or perhaps ages). As we

have seen in this and earlier passages, Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Seal is clearly asso-

ciated with the revelation of God’s Word, that is, His final Word—as the year

800 approaches.

Our investigation of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s teaching on walå ya leads us to a

number of conclusions. The concept, from Ibn >Arab•, of the ranking of the

messenger, prophet, and saint being reversed in the single person of Mu˙am-

mad is not only taken up by Mu˙ammad Waf å but also expanded upon. We

saw that he presents an interpretation that uses two perspectives—one of exo-teric sanctity, the other of esoteric sanctity—to make two different hierarchies

possible. Yet, the most significant observation is that of a picture of three tiers.

The first is the prophetic Seal Mu˙ammad, the second is the progression of

Renewers; and the third is the Seal of the Word, who completes the cycles of

renewal. For the purposes of this study we may make some functional compar-

isons. It seems that for Mu˙ammad Waf å’ the tier of the Renewers plays the

role General prophecy (nubuwwa >å mma) plays for Ibn >Arab•. Of course, Ibn

>Arab•’s conception extended to humanity in general, whereas Mu˙ammadWaf å’s renewers are utterly Islamic. Nevertheless, this General prophecy, like

the role of the Renewers, serves to extend the possibility of spiritual authority,

beyond the age of messengers and prophets, into the era of post-Mu˙ammadan

saints. It should be added here that the Greater sainthood (walå ya kubr å ) of the

early Shådhiliyya plays a similar yet less clearly defined role. On the question

of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Seal of the age, this figure most closely approximates

Ibn >Arab•’s Seal of General sainthood (walå ya >å mma), who more specifically,

is the apocalyptic figure Jesus. This comparison is somewhat forced, however,

since Mu˙ammad Waf å’s Seal of the age completes all sainthoods—sainthoods

that for Ibn >Arab• would be distinguished as either general or Mu˙ammadan,

thus each receiving its own distinct Seal. For Mu˙ammad Waf å’ the final Seal

is not Jesus, but rather it appears to be himself.116




The medieval Egyptian intellectual milieu in which the Waf å’s functioned has

yet to be reconstructed in detail. As for >Al• Waf å’ personally, it will be seen in

the following discussion that he was well versed in mystical thought—fromthe early Shådhiliyya, the Akbarian school, and the classical sufis. He was also

trained in kalå m (theology), as the various discussions below make clear. His

able handling of concepts such as the ‘senses’ and the ‘intellects’ signals a sub-

stantial training in philosophy. Further, his reference to the biology of pregnancy

suggests a basic grasp of the science of medicine. These observations are per-

haps not surprising since our subject was from a well-established family. An edu-

cated man of the medieval Islamic world would normally have been exposed to

the principal sciences as they existed in his day. However, the distinct presence

of a pro->Alid sentiment in >Al• Waf å’s speculations on sanctity demonstrate an

openness to non-traditional Sunni sources. Of course Cairo was the cosmopoli-

tan hub of the mediteranean Muslim world, where ideas circulated rather freely

among the learned classes. It is in this milieu that >Al• Waf å’ came into contact

with not only the school of Ibn >Arab•, but also a pro->Alid perspective, or at

least an intellectual perspective that felt free to avail itself, mystically and

philosophically, of what it found most compelling in the Sh•>• tradition.

In this chapter we shall explore >Al• Waf å’s thinking with particular

attenttion to his theory of walå ya. As his father did, >Al• lays the existentialgroundwork through a discussion of the unity of God, creation, and Divine

Self-disclosure. In brief, his position is that existence is at once unified in God

and subject to the differentiation of creation but that the mystic vision holds

both perspectives simultaneously. This existential tension reappears in his dis-

cussion of the role of the teacher, who functions for the aspirant as a mediator

Chapter 6

Sanctity according to >Al• Waf å’



between contingent and necessary existence. These discussions are interesting

in themselves, but they also contextualize >Al•’s complex elaborations on

sanctity. It will be seen from his distinction between sainthood and prophecythat one perspective may encompass both elements. The nature of the mysteri-

ous figure al-Khå∂ir is important here. Our discussion ends with >Al•’s explicit

treatment of sainthood, and his effort to identify himself and his father within

this mystical universe.

Divine Oneness, Self-disclosure, and Creation

In the previous chapter we saw that Mu˙ammad Waf å was not without his crit-

ics. Al-Sakhåw• had pointed to what he saw as an excessive blurring of the

existential line between the Divine and creation in the writings of both father

Waf å’ and son. Polemics, and more often principled criticism, have been a his-

torical reality for most branches of sufism from early on in the medieval

period. Ibn al-Jawz• had (d. 597/1200) ridiculed the miracles of a number of

so-called saints in Iraq,1 and the Syrian doctor of law Ibn Taymiyya (d.

728/1328) criticized a number of practices, in particular that of shrine visita-

tion.2 Yet critics could also come from within. The sixteenth-century biogra-pher al-Sha>rån•, clearly an ally of saints and sufism in general, mounted his

own criticism of one aspect of >Al• Waf å’s teaching. In what is his largest entry

on any one figure in his al-Tabaqå t al-kubr å , al-Sha>rån• stops to challenge a

passage he has quoted from >Al• Waf å’s Waßå yå . The lengthy quotation pre-

sented emphasizes the unity of the Creator and creation. We are told that “He

[God] is the essence of all that is existent, and everything in existence is His

Attribute.”3 Further, there is nothing to the plurality of these existents, since

their single shared existence is their only reality and essence. Discussion thenturns to creation itself, saying the first thing in existence is not these existents,

but rather it is their ordaining (taqd • r ). This ordaining is, from their perspec-

tive, preexistential. Thus there are two phases of the creative movement, one is

ordaining while the other is a bringing into tangible physical existence. The

first is a descent of existence to a station that has no existence, while the sec-

ond is the descent of that which has no existence onto the station of existence.

The various ordainings may also be thought of as the descent of metaphysical

existence (i.e., that of degree, attribute, meaning, truth, etc.) It is according to

these metaphysical existences, and specifically the essences thus constructed,

that the particulars are engendered.4 To this al-Sha>rån• appends the following

statement: “All that is in this utterance is based on the school of Absolute One-

ness (wa˙da mu† laqa).”5 This is a rather striking charge to level, since the term

Absolute Oneness is certainly meant to indicate an extreme form of identifica-

tion of the Creator with creation. The accusation is not categorical, however,




since al-Sha>rån• goes on to say that the rest of >Al• Waf å’s writings do not

demonstrate this excess.6 However, it seems that al-Sha>rån• is not being quite

honest here. The quotation he provides does begin with a comment stressingthe Absolute Oneness perspective, but the subsequent discussion—also

appearing in al-Sha>rån•’s epitome—of the processes of ordaining and coming

into being, certainly nuances the Absolute Oneness position first established.

The objection may be in fact to the vocabulary used and not the overall posi-

tion taken. Al-Sha>rån• may have been nervous about the bold identification of

God with existence, and the use of “Attribute” as synonymous with creation

would have made him uncomfortable. Of course al-Sha>rån• does not want to

place >Al• Waf å’ once and for all in the camp of Absolute Oneness, yet he does

feel it necessary to challenge that position when it does emerge. This appears to

be an exercise in attacking a straw man for the benefit of a suspicious audience.

Despite the insincerity of al-Sha>rån•’s comments, the subject matter remains

important for us. In what follows, we shall look more closely at >Al• Waf å’s

position on Absolute Being and Self-disclosure. It will be seen that al-Sha>rån•

certainly could have done a better job of analysis than he did with the above

comments. Although we may not say that there is a consciously distinct philoso-

phical doctrine of Existence in the writings of >Al• Waf å’, a survey of statements

on the subject makes it clear that he holds an understanding of the Oneness of God and creation, and yet points to a differentiation within this Oneness. We

will see also that he offers a synthetic understanding of the two perspectives,

which encompasses both at once. It is significant that >Al• Waf å’s teachings on

this subject employ the vocabulary of existence (wuj¥d ) much more often than

his father did. We noted in the previous chapter that Mu˙ammad Waf å’s doc-

trine of sanctity and spiritual guidance hung on this existential framework, and

we shall see that >Al•’s does likewise.

>Al• Waf å’ makes a number of statements that emphasize the single natureof God and creation. We read, for example, “He encompasses all, as if He were

a sea and they [the entities] are His waves; that is, He is the reality of every-

thing and the essence of everything, and everything is He Himself and His

Attribute.”7 From this perspective, there is no independence for either the Cre-

ator or creation. Thus acts such as prayer, which seem to hinge on a distinction

between servant and Lord, are in fact a Self-reflexive act. We are told, “Noth-

ing trully thanks God except God; the servant is powerless to do this.”8 Else-

where we read that the only true praise of God is from God Himself: “Every

seeker simply seeks al-Óaqq; sometimes he reaches that object in truth, so heworships Him by an unveiling, and sometimes he reaches it by imagination

[only], so he worships Him through a veil. Thus no worshiper truly worships,

except God [Himself].”9 The implications of this oneness also apply to cre-

ation. The truths that gifted souls may attain are themselves indistinguishable

from those souls: “The gnostic is the source of his gnosis, the verifier is the

Sanctity according to > Al• Waf å ’ 121



veracity (˙aq• qa) of what is verified to him.”10 Thus, with the truth and the

searcher being of the same nature, ones search is self-referential, not requiring

anything beyond this oneness.This perspective of Oneness is also expressed using the vocabulary of

being. If God is in the end the only reality, He is also the only true Being. Thus

we are told that the perfect understanding of creation is one that sees the Divine

behind it at all times. >Al• Waf å’ writes, “He who witnesses the All-holy as the

existent of [all] matters simply witnesses perfection in existence.”11 Elsewhere

we are told that God is the essential existence of all things in creation.

God is your existence with regard to your essence, while you are His

existence with regard to His entity (>ain) . . . He is the essential Exis-

tence determined [specifically] in all existants. All things are His

Attributes and Names; and by virtue of [essential Existence’s] divine

level, the order of [common] existence functions properly, and its

standing is completed at every level according to its [that level’s]

due.12

Thus the essential existence of created things is God. Yet from the perspective

of the Divine this creation is only an external form. For the created, however,this existence is essential. God/existence may extend into creation, but His/its

presence there is only His/its external aspect—His Attributes and Names.

From the perspective of this aspect itself, this extention is whole and essential.

This existential model may also be approached from the individual’s per-

spective. >Al• Waf å’ tells his reader that the existence of all things is identical to

his or her own. He says, “If the existence of all is your own existence, then

the “all” is from Him to you and by you.”13 This individual’s existence, as he

experiences it, is the “all.” Even the Divine, as it can be known, is from thisexistence. We read,

Your existence is your Lord by its lordship, and your God by its

divinity, and your Merciful by its mercy. And the same is applicable

by analogy to all meanings and attributes. Sometimes [your exis-

tence] appears to you by virtue of those levels, or some of them in

your perception, from a perspective by which you see them as you;

and thus you see it [the Lord, God etc.] by them [lordship, divinity

etc.] [as] your existence. Sometimes [your existence appears] from aperspective by which you see them [lordship, divinity etc.] as other

than you; and thus you see it [the Lord, God etc] by them [lordship,

divinity etc.] [as] the existence of other than you. In reality it is only

your existence, since existence—why, how or wherever it appears—

only appears to you because it is your own existence. You do not grasp




this nor anything else except by the fact that it is your existence which

you have grasped.14

Despite the heavy reliance on pronouns in this passage, the point is clear. The

individual’s experience is limited to his own sphere of finite existence.15 Thus

“God” for him is simply the divine element of his own existence, or in other

words, his “God” is only present to the degree that his existence can portray

Him according to its limited divinity. This experience may occur from two per-

spectives, either one that sees God through its own existence, or one that sees

Him through what is understood to be the existence of another. These two per-

spectives, however, are also both within one’s sphere of limited existence. The

passage concludes by pointing out that understanding is, in effect, simply the

exploration of the dimensions of one’s own existence.

From these quotations scattered throughout the writings of >Al• Waf å’, we

see that the concept of ‘oneness’ has more than a single dimension. The first,

and most obvious, is that of the Divine as source of all creation.This may be

looked at from the prespective of the Creator or creation. For the latter, this

reality means that in knowing oneself one knows all else, including the Cre-

ator. We saw also that this doctrine may be expressed in terms of existence.

Here God is in creation as its existence. From the Divine perspective this isnecessary Existence, but for creation, the existence it knows is only contingent.

Although we have here focused on the “oneness” statements, we must also

take into consideration the related element of Self-disclosure (tajall• ). As we

saw at the start of this discussion, the degree of existential independence

accorded to creation is important. An utter denial of creation’s existence would

lead to charges of pantheism. In the previous chapter we noted that the most

famous figure associated with this school of wa˙da mu† laqa was Ibn Sab>•n.16

For >Al

•Waf

å’, as for his father and for Ibn

>Arab

•, a degree of independence isindeed granted to creation. For the most part this is done through the concept

of divine Self-disclosure, which functions on the premise that God/necessary

existence is meaningfully distinguishable from creation/contingent existence.

>Al• Waf å’ makes it quite clear that God’s Self-disclosure is an important,

and independent, entity. In a discussion reminiscent of a Gnostic theurgy, we

are told that Self-disclosures must be sought out among lesser forms of cre-

ation. A picture is painted of tajall• hidden among base material existence.

It is related in the hadith that, “God created the bodies (Òhs“H) in dark-

ness, and then He sprinkled upon them His light. He upon whom this

light is bestowed is guided, but he who misses it goes astray.”17 The

meaning of the bodies being in darkness is that they are levels of

obscurity and deception. Their condition is due to their corporeality

being a dark fancy (L dif©HL ˆm©H), while the light scattered upon them is




the Ruling-Knowing-Rational-Spirit, which is from the Self-disclo-

sure of the Compassionate-Merciful-Existence. The bodies, which

conceal these sprinkled . . . spirits, are as a black veil covering thehappy moon-lit face. He who, from this face, only sees its veil, is not

happy, nor does he find joy. This is like he who sees of the saints only

their bodies; he does not then remember God by witnessing the [hid-

den] light to which they point. He who raises the veils is joyful at wit-

nessing the intended.18

The guiding light concealed in levels of obscurity is the divine Self-disclosure.

The aim of the individual is to avoid the gross bodies and to find the light.

Here >Al• Waf å’ is certainly far from his previous statements on the Oneness of

existence. Elsewhere we read that God’s Word may enter the world, taking on

various forms. This remains in essence God, yet it is a distinct Self-disclosure.

We read,

The Name is the identity (> ayn) of the Named at every level according

to its due19 . . . The Speech is the identity of the Speaker in the audi-

tory realm. It was said: “We came to them with a Book (of guidance

as a mercy upon those who believe)” (Q. 7:52), so He is the Speakerand He is the Speech. The Qur’an is His rational identity, and the Dis-

cernment ( furqå n) is His imaginary identity,20 and that which is read,

which is referred to by the pronoun “it” in “you read it” is His sensi-

ble identity. So the recited is a descent of the Discernment, which

[itself] is a descent of the Qur’an. The Qur’an is the descent of the

Speech, and the Speech is the Speaker [Himself]; and all are its diver-

sified Self-determinations of the sum of His Self-disclosure referred

to as “Speech.”21

Here, although the identification of God with his Speech is clear, the important

point is that divine Attributes are present among creation—with a certain degree

of independence. This Speech is a Self-disclosure of God, operating simultane-

ously on three levels, that of the rational, the imaginal, and the sensible.

The importance of Self-disclosure is also essential in the act and preserva-

tion of creation. We are told that, “the occasions of creation are Self-disclosures

of the All-Creating, and the occasions of subsistence are Self-disclosures of the

Sustainer.”22 >Al• Waf å’ also describes the levels of existential differentiation,

which appear as divine Attributes. Apassage we saw earlier, in chapter 4, makes

this point clearly:

Reality is a single essential existence particularized by its own princi-

ples, which are its attributes and existences. Creation is the levels of




proportion which are fixed within their limits . . . As al-Óaqq said . . .

according to the reading of ∂ amma over the lå m of the word “kull”:

“Verily, We are all things We have created in proportion.” (Q. 54:49)23

The essential point here is the distinction made between elements of an other-

wise unified existence. The Qur’anic passage notes that “all things” are created

in proportion, that is, according to their established limits.24 >Al• Waf å’s unusual

Qur’anic reading emphasizes the common identity of “all things” with their

original source, rather than their idependent existence, as is assumed in the

common textual reading.

The question might arise as to what the purpose of Self-disclosure is at all.

If there is Oneness, then why is there differentiation? >Al• Waf å’ does not pose

the question as such, but in effect he does answer it for us. In short, there are

two things to be said. The first, which will be dealt with in detail below, is that

these two realities must be grasped simultaneously if one is to attain the high-

est mystical insight. The second is that differentiation plays an important teleo-

logical role. The point here is that creation is a mode of communication

between the limited contingent souls and the Ultimate Necessary. Creation

serves as a sign, directing searchers to the Truth beyond. >Al• Waf å’ makes this

teleology clear in the following passage:

The realm of creation was actualized simply for the recognition of al-

Óaqq through the differentiation of His Names and His Attributes in

the manifestations of His signs. “I was an unknown treasure, so I cre-

ated creation, and made Myself known to them; so by Me they know

Me.”25 Another confirmation of this is [the Qur’anic passage 51:56]

“I created jinn and man only to worship Me” that is, to know [Me].26

The more one knows the state of the signs, the more one knows of themanifestations ( n ˆhz¬) of the Names and the Attributes; and the more

one knows the manifestations of the named and attributed, the more

one knows of realities of these manifestations, according to one’s

gnosis of the external realities.27

Another version of the same hadith is quoted elsewhere to much the same

effect. Here >Al• Waf å’ comments quite directly:

He said of the hadith “I was an unknown treasure,” the meaning is thelevel of abstraction (V n ï). [The meaning of] “And I wanted to be

known, so I created creation” is I ordained an elite (]∂ n ∂vr∆ h˚hd¨HÔN v ®), I

made Myself known to them and guided them to all of it [i.e. level of

abstraction] by all of it [i.e. creation]. “And by Me they know Me”,

since I am the All.28




look upon the reality of existence and you return command of its

existences to Him, then you are an upholder of Oneness. When you

look upon the limits of the intellected quiddities and you return thecommand of their existence to them, then you are an upholder of plu-

rality. When you have done in each circle what wisdom requires be

done of the necessities of the two views in that circle, with your veri-

fication of them, then you are the proper perfect Sayyid.33

Thus, if we can look upon reality, without its existential clothing, we may

attain union. If we look upon the entification of entities, beyond their exis-

tence, then we have reached a state of differentiation. The circles of both dif-

ference and union each entail a particular verification. Perfection requires that

both verifications be made.

This insight, achieved by the perfect Sayyid, may also be described as a

knowledge of both the realities of creation and the hidden divine Reality. >Al•

Waf å’, returning to a term used by his father, calls those who have attained this

insight the “elite:” “The elite (makhß¥ß) of God is he who penetrates, in every

way, both His secret and what is commonly known of Him (*ni“). None but

God encompasses him, and none but he encompasses God. However, the non-

elite are fettered to things like the world, heaven, the intermediary world, hell,and the afterlife.34 The elite are not simply those who have attained to esoteric

insights. They have “penetrated” both the perspective of the esoteric and that

of the exoteric. This is the resolution of what we described earlier as the oppo-

sition between divine Oneness and its Self-manifestation. It is an answer which

requires the synthesis of two logically distinct (and self-consistent) modes of

divine Reality.35

The Teacher and Oneness

As was seen in the previous chapter, Mu˙ammad Waf å’s teaching on the role

of the sufi shaykh was weak on proscriptive details but dramatic in its claim

that the shaykh is to be understood as one of the manifestations of the divine

Reality. >Al• Waf å’s discussions of the matter are much more extensive than

those of his father but are not a departure in substance. The son’s treatment of

the role of the spiritual master, like his father’s, describes neither the stages of

the mystical way nor the various mystical unveilings received along the way.

Instead, a picture is drawn in which the teacher represents an existential reality

to his follower. The discussion is not about the positive content of any mystical

techniques to be passed on; rather it is about the proper understanding the stu-

dent must have of the nature and role of the shaykh. The basic message here is

that the teacher is at once simply a part of contingent, differentiated existence,




yet he serves to those beneath him as a sign pointing to the necessary divine

Existence. All creation lacks necessary existence, but some manifestations are

more important than others. Spiritual guides, saints, prophets, and messengersobviously have more important roles to play. In his discussion of the shaykh,

>Al• Waf å’ centers on his existential role; an existence that must be understood

in light of his doctrine of oneness and Self-disclosure.

>Al• Waf å’s statements on the spiritual guide do include some fairly tradi-

tional insights, such as the need of the aspirant for guidance. For example, in

an echo of a popular sufi saying, we are told, “He who has no teacher, has no

protector. He who has no protector has Satan taking care of him.”36 Predictably,

allegiance to ones guide is also noted: “The aspirtant is he who is realised in his

[spiritual] goal through the essence (> ayn) of his teacher.”37 This loyalty must

begin with imitation, if gnosis is to be passed on. >Al• Waf å’ writes, “He who

conforms to his teacher in act, follows him by what he is told of his [the

teacher’s] gnosis. But he who is at variance with [the teacher] in act, his follow-

ing, [which is only] by the imagined meanings of his [the teacher’s] sayings, is

lost.”38

We also find descriptions of the relationship between the aspirant and his

shaykh that use terminology usually reserved for the Divine. We are told, “The

true follower is a throne for the Mercy (ra˙må niyya) of his teacher”39 Else-where >Al• Waf å’, in a description comparing weak spiritual insight among

common sufis to a barren womb, notes that it is by an effusion ( fay∂ ) from

ones teacher that such insight is gained.

Doctors say that coldness of the womb is the cause of barrenness.

Likewise, the soul of the student, when there is no anguish of passion

or burning of desire for the goal, there is not born in it the form of his

[teacher’s] command, by the effusion of his teacher upon it. In this he islike wet fuel—the firebrand produces nothing but smoke in him. This is

like the frivolous claims which occur to the souls among the general

sufis (qawm), who are without the fire of desire and sincerity.40

Thus the spirit of the student must desire its spiritual goal in order for his

teacher to effuse his command upon it. This is rather peculiar language, but the

message itself is clear.

The epistemological role of the shaykh, in short, is that to truly know him

is to truly know God, as much as He may be grasped through creation. The

links are repeatedly made between the self, the teacher, and God. “Your know-

ing your own reality,” >Al• Waf å’ tells us, “is commensurate with your knowing

your teacher.”41 Knowing this teacher is key to knowing oneself and thus to

knowing God. We are told that “if you find your true teacher, you have found

your reality. If you find your reality you have found God. If you find God, then




you have found everything, so everything desired is simply in the love of this

teacher.”42 The aim of the student is thus to grasp the Divine, by finding his

own reality, which itself may only be reached through his teacher. As men-tioned above, >Al• Waf å’ is not concerned with describing the details of the sufi

path, and here the specifics of loving the teacher or following his command are

left unexplored.

The role of the shaykh is a shifting one. First it is as a guiding will to

which the student must submit himself, second it is a manifestation of God. In

the following passage >Al• Waf å’ explains these stages:

The teacher is the manifestation of the secret of Lordship for his fol-

lower. The follower must be attentive to the command of his teacher

and not turn away—to the left or the right—from this teacher. Have

you not heard the word of the older son Jacob, “I will not leave this

land until my father allows it” (Q. 12:80), then he said, “or Allah

commands me”; he also said to them, “turn ye back to your father.” It

is clear that the follower has no direction to turn towards except that

of his teacher, so much so that [even] when he has realized [in him-

self] the reality of his teacher, and the difference between their two

stations is resolved, God [still] is his direction by way of the directionof this teacher, by which the follower becomes certain.43

Submission to the teacher representing divine Lordship is essential because it

leads to the improvement of the follower. More interestingly, the point is made

that in approaching the teacher, the student is approaching the direction of the

divine manifestation. Another description of the function of the teacher pro-

vides more detail. We are told,

The starting point for the aspirant is that his intentions be endowed

with the signs of the People of prosperity and sanctity. And if the

form of his [own] piety and sanctity is unveiled in his vision of his

teacher, in the clarity that is the form of his teacher, then he says that

it is his teacher who is the pious saint; and so he asks for the blessings

of his insights and . . . his noble ideas. He seeks his favour until the

angel of solicitude, Isråf •l, blows the form of the spirit of Adamic des-

ignation into the Trumpet of the form of his heart.44 So here he sees

his teacher as the Adam of the Time, the king of the reigns of becom-

ing, and he exalts him as a son exalts his revered father. This occurs

to the point that the veil of his Adamic form is removed from the

beauty of what bestows honour on him from the Muhammadan Spirit.

So here he sees his teacher as a Muhammadan Sayyid, to whom he is

servant . . . and when he looks upon his teacher he sees only the One




Self-disclosing in every aspect, according to the capacity of the wit-

ness. So he becomes non-existent in the face of being, and erased in a

presence of witnessing. So his first matter is conformity, the middle[matter] is sincerity, and the last is realization.45

The first goal for the aspirant is to associate with proper teachers, here the “Peo-

ple of prosperity and sanctity.” Then, if he sees his own sanctity in the form of

the teacher, he will benefit from specific spiritual insight. Once his heart

receives its angelic inspiration, he sees the teacher as the engendering figure of

Adam. The next step has the aspirant perceiving the Muhammadan nature of the

teacher. Finally, the insight is reached that this teacher is simply a catalyst for

the unlimited possibilities of God’s unveiling through creation and that the only

limitation lies in the viewer of this Self-disclosure. The student, through his wit-

nessing of his teacher, is able to transcend his particular and contingent exis-

tence. >Al• Waf å’ then sumarizes neatly for us these levels of insight: the first is

his “conformity” to the ways of the saintly teacher; the second is a “sincerity”

that inspires insight into the higher mystical elements of the teacher’s nature;

and “realization” is the final insight grasping at least the beginning of the Nec-

essary existence beyond the shaykh and all contingent creation.

This model of spiritual direction rests on the idea that the teacher acts as awindow to the higher mystical realities, rather than as simply one who imparts

a set of teachings to his students. This model also differs from the traditional

presentation of the shaykh as spiritual guide to the aspirant. This traditional

understanding is reflected typically in the writings of the famous Ab¥ Madyan

(d. 594/1198), where we are told,

The shaykh is one to whom your essence bears witness by entrusting

itself (to his care), and (to whom) your innermost self (bears witness)by respecting and magnifying him. The shaykh is one who instructs

you with his morals, refines you with his skills, and illuminates your

inner being with his radiance. The shaykh is one who makes you

whole in his presence (with God) and preserves you when you are far

from the effects of his luminosity.46

This passage makes clear the central role of the shaykh, but in comparison to

the pronouncements of >Al• Waf å’ above, it is rudimentary.

Another element of our writer’s concept of ‘spiritual direction’ is the

shaykh’s role as a mirror to the aspirant’s condition. We are told, “The reality of

the special aspirant in relation to his teacher is like what one sees in the mirror of

oneself, corresponding to the mirror’s capacity.”47 In the same vein, elsewhere it

is said, “Knowing (Gj†nu¬) your reality is commensurate with your knowledge

of your teacher.”48 How the aspirant sees his shaykh is the essential element in




his definition of himself. >Al• Waf å’ tells us, “You are in the form which you

see your teacher as . . . If you witness him as creation, then you are a creation;

if you witness him as Truth, then you are a Truth.”49

The point is made clear inthe following: “The image of the speaking shaykh is a mirror of the secret of

the sincere aspirant. When he [the student] looks into it [the mirror] with per-

spicacity, he sees in it the form of his [own] soul.”50 Thus the shaykh is not

only a window to reality beyond creation, but he also serves as the aspirant’s

only true insight into himself. The point is unclear—how one can only know

oneself through another—until we remember that for >Al• Waf å’ the role of the

shaykh is existential, that is, his function is to offer access to (or a presence in)

the realm of Necessary existence. This is not done by the passing down of a

mystical secret, rather it is presented as an occasion within contingent existence,

an occasion that is a key to the eternal Necessary. As we saw above in our dis-

cussion of “Oneness and the many,” creation, or differentiation, does contain a

seed of its unified source. It is this seed that allows the many contingent beings

to know at least the possibility of a higher necessary realm. Thus the shaykh is

the mirror to the aspirant; his origin is divine, and so the aspirant may see him-

self in him in any number of forms. The Self-disclosures are infinite in possibil-

ity. The teacher allows him to see his unlimited self and thus to see his Lord.

This existential function of the shaykh is clearly indicated. >Al• Waf å’ tellsus that the aspirant’s very existence is derived from his shaykh. We read, “The

existence of the sincere aspirant, whereby he is truth, is only with his teacher,

who speaks the clear Truth.”51 This existence seems to be transferred to the

aspirant in much the same way classical sufism spoke of a mystic soul extin-

guishing itself in the Divine. In another passage we read, “The tongue of the

state of every teacher speaking the clear Truth says to each sincere aspirant,

“Approach me until I love you, for when I love you I see you as kin to me, and

I am manifested in you to the degree you are prepared for it.””52 >

Al•

Waf å

’makes it clear that the aspirant’s only source of necessary existence is the

shaykh. In the following passage he first describes imagination as the possible

of the cognitive reality and this reality as the necessary to that imagined. The

aspirant and his teacher have a similar relationship.

The cognitive reality is necessary existence to its actual image [imag-

ination], and the actual image is possible existence to the cognitive

reality. O sincere aspirant, your necessary existence, by which you are

true, is only with your teacher speaking by the clear Truth. If you arerealized in him, then it is as if you will not cease in truth, otherwise

you remain [merely] created.53

The existential relationship is described rather briefly here, but the point is clear

that the shaykh is the aspirant’s way out of possible or contingent existence into




largely falls away once sainthood is addressed. We saw how dramatic the

claims were regarding the shaykh’s function in creation and might expect the

saint to operate in some similar fashion, perhaps as some kind of super teacheror a universalized presence of necessary existence. Instead, this line of think-

ing is set aside for one which sees sainthood in quite different terms. As we

shall see, >Al• Waf å’ reverts to fairly standard descriptions of the saints as the

inspired elect of God. It must be noted, however, that our author does move on

to more fertile ground. The more significant point of concern becomes the rela-

tionship between sainthood and prophethood. Not unlike his predecessors, Ibn

>Arab• and the early Shådhiliyya, it seems that walå ya for >Al• Waf å’ is to be

understood largely in relation to nubuwwa.

According to >Al• Waf å’, the saints are first signs of God in creation.

Through a rather loose interpretation of a Qur’anic passage, the truth of the

“perfecting saints” is placed beyond question.

“When you see men engaged in vain discourse about our signs, then

turn away from them.” (Q. 6:68) In this is a notice to turn away from

those who engage in vain discourse concerning the truth of the perfecting

saints (Kdgl;˜H/hd©M#H), for they are among the signs of God pointing to

Him; as He said, “We have set you as a sign to the people.” (Q. 2:259)56

Beyond the identification of the saints with the signs of God, the second quota-

tion evokes a miraculous Qur’anic episode of revivification. The reader’s mind

is left to associate the “perfecting saints” with the story of a doubting man who

had been dead for a hundred years, returning to life, as a clear miracle. In a

general way, the saints are also to be thought of as effective guides for souls

seeking God. “It is written in hadith: ‘He whose feet are dusty from the path of

God, God will remove his face from the Fire for seventy years.’ Included inthis is he who walks with a saint to the Face of God, hoping for His satisfac-

tion. Truly, God removes his face from the fire.”57 Thus, according to >Al•

Waf å’ the saint is a leader upon the path of righteousness, a path that delivers

the servant from Hell. This guiding function extends to wider circles also. We

are told that the kings of this world must submit to the saints, who are the true

‘ulama of the community. They are the real guides since they are the inheritors

of God’s messengers and prophets.58 These saints may be guides, but they are

not necessarily models of behavior. >Al• Waf å’ opens with a discussion that

concludes that not all truths and divine communications were contained in the

Prophet’s Sunna, as related to posterity by his companions, since “they forgot

much and hid things that they saw a benefit in hiding.” Thus we may not

always know how to judge things that are not subject to clear comment in

scripture. Turning to the saints, the point is made that in those instances we

fail to grasp the meaning of their actions or words, we should “accept their




spiritual states (a˙wa \l), but we do not emulate them.”59 In this discussion the

example evoked is that of al-Kha∂ir,60 but a much wider issue is also being

addressed by implication. This issue is the treatment of what in sufi vocbularyis called the “majdh¥b,” or “he who is drawn to God.” This enraptured figure

is a standard saintly type, distinguished from the more sober model, in the

accounts of sufi lives and miracles. These individuals, present also in the

medieval Christian and Hindu worlds, were characterized by miracle working,

in addition to shocking behavior while under ecstatic influence. As we noted in

a previous chapter, however, the Waf å’iyya themselves were at the oppposite

end of this spectrum of saint typology. Defence of these enraptured was not a

serious concern for >Al• Waf å’, but the idea of inspiration as a continuing cur-

rency in the religious economy was. Also, both the example of al-Kha∂ir and

that of the many common enraptured individuals are examples of a mystical

inspiration independent of the norms of exoteric religion. Kha∂ir’s inspiration

was beyond the prophet Moses’ grasp, and that of the enraptured is beyond the

control of the doctors of Law.

Beyond these fairly general descriptions of sainthood, we find that >Al•

Waf å’ does have something more substantial to say on the subject. Before we

take up his interpretation of the Seal of Sainthood, we must discuss his treat-

ment of the figure al-Kha∂ir. It is through this figure, and specifically in hisrelation to the prophet Moses, that >Al• Waf å’ fleshes out his understanding of

walå ya. There is no unified theory of sainthood presented in his comments, but

three distinct points are made. Before exploring these in detail, we can identify

them in shorthand. The first is that the prophet Moses, as an impatient student

to the teacher al-Kha∂ir, acted inappropriately. The second is that the relation-

ship between these two figures models the relationship between prophecy/mis-

sion and sainthood. The third point is that the figure of al-Kha∂ir, beyond this

relationship, functions as the vehicle for the transmission of walå ya, whether itbe to saints, prophets, or messengers.

There is little debate in >Al• Waf å’s mind about the prophet Moses’ failures

as a follower. In the Qur’anic story, al-Kha∂ir is reluctant to accept Moses as a

follower, saying, “You will not have patience with me. How can you be patient

about things which you do not understand?”(18:67–68). When Moses insists,

al-Kha∂ir agrees to lead him, but sets one condition, which >Al• Waf å’ com-

ments on to draw out some more general principles:

“If you would follow me, then do not ask me anything until I speak toyou concerning it.”(Q. 18:70) That is because the perfection of the fol-

lower is that he be certain of his leader and the path that is love and

glorification. Of its [love’s] effects is conformity of the will of the

lover to that of his beloved. He [the follower] does not anticipate him

in speech or act. If he asks his leader about that which he has not spoken




to him of, then the wisdom of the leader has decided to not answer the

follower. If he answers him then harm would occur, contrary to wis-

dom, but if he does not answer him then he will find no relief from theagitation of the follower. Thus the purity of love for him becomes

cloudy, and the path connecting him to his leader is blocked.61

The image, parallel to the Qur’anic story, is one of a pestering aspirant who

will not truly conform to the guidance of his teacher. This disobedience taints

his love for the shaykh. What is more significant for our discussion of walå ya

is the fact that >Al• Waf å’ does not hold back in subordinating the prophet (in

this case playing the role of aspirant) to the saint (seen here in his role as

teacher).62 The impatience of the follower is certainly not an unusual thing. We

are told specifically that some see only the external material forms of the

saints: “This is like he who sees of the saints only their bodies; he does not

then remember God by witnessing the [hidden] light to which they point.”63

The second question addressed in >Al• Waf å’s discussion of the figure al-

Kha∂ir is that of the relationship between prophecy/mission and sanctity.

Nowhere does our writer make definite conclusions on the subject, but his

comments in a number of places do make clear a particular understanding of

this relationship. When al-Kha∂ir has reached the limit of his patience with thequestioning Moses, he draws the line, saying, “This is the parting between me

and you” (Q. 18:78). >Al• Waf å’ comments on this separation: “It is a parting

between he who works in God ( ya> malu bi-Allå h), and he who works by the

order of God ( ya> malu bi-amri Allå h).”64 The context described for this work is

that done by al-Kha∂ir when he rebuilds a crumbling wall without asking for

payment from its owners (Q. 18:77). >Al• Waf å’ contrasts this with Moses’ hav-

ing asked for compensation from God on another occasion (Q. 28:24). The

point here is that al-Kha∂ir, as a saintly model, represents “working in God,”that is, one who acts directly by God’s agency. Here we remember the hadith

popular among the sufis in which God says of His closest servant: “If I love

him I am his hearing . . . and his sight . . . and his hand by which he strikes”

(Bukhår•, Riqåq 38). This is in contrast to the prophet who works only in

response to God’s command. He brings God’s message as he has been com-

manded. (One thinks here of the start of the prophet Mu˙ammad’s mission,

which was marked by the command “Recite!”) Yet heeding this command is the

limit of a prophet’s obedience, while the saint’s obedience is of another order.

Thus the unbridgeable difference between the saint (al-Kha∂ir) and the prophet

(Moses) is that the former works as an extention of God’s Will and the latter in

response to God’s Command. Of his shocking (yet ultimately beneficent) acts,

al-Kha∂ir himself tells Moses, “I did not do it of my own accord” (Q. 18:82),

making it clear that he is not the author of these acts; the implication being that

he is a vehicle for the divine Will.




>Al• Waf å’ also describes the difference between the prophet and the saint

in another way. The first is characterized as having earned his position, while

the latter has his bestowed upon him.

He said of the story of Moses and al-Kha∂ir: There are those worship-

pers whom God has appointed to the elucidation of the earned

(Ôhfsj;˜H hdƒ); and there are those whom He has appointed to the elu-

cidation of the bestowed (Ôhƒmˆm˜H hdƒ). Neither will oppose the other,

nor will he share what he has been appointed for, even though the one

is a prophet, the other a saint.65

These descriptions of the prophets and saints are not developed further by our

author, but the distinction being made is categorical. The two explications, or

modes of perception, are mutually exclusive.

On the relationship of sanctity to prophecy >Al• Waf å’ also makes a second

rather different claim. Through a lengthy comment on the unnamed attendant

(hj†) to Moses, the point is made that prophecy retains an authority over sanc-

tity. In contrast to the observation above, distinguishing he who works in God

from he who works by God’s command, here Moses’ attendant is a participant

as neither, but rather the beneficiary of an overall understanding of this rela-tionship, an understanding that places both in their proper place. The passage

opens with the following:

Moses met al-Kha∂ir with his attendant, only in order to unite for this

attendant the sea of mission from his prophethood, and the sea of

sanctity from the particular quality of al-Kha∂ir. The secret in this is

that the rule that obtains between a saint and a messenger, which is

necessarily linked to his [the latter’s] sharia, is like the rule that obtainsbetween a star and the sun.66

The point here is that the purpose of the encounter between Moses and Kha∂ir

was to show to the attendant (who was to be the future khalifa) the relationship

between the role of the prophet and that of the saint. >Al• Waf å’ also speaks of

“the particular quality of al-Kha∂ir,” meaning the form of the Kha∂ir-ian spirit

as it appeared to Moses. This idea will be elaborated upon below. >Al• Waf å’

follows these statements by saying that the attribute of sainthood exists along-

side that of prophethood. In other words, sanctity is not at odds with the Law,rather it is the surrogate in the absence of the lawgiver (prophet). The passage

continues,

When the sun sets, then each star appears by its own quality (L ;πH);

but when the sun appears, it incorporates the quality of all the stars




within its own quality. This is like when the text appears, it incorpo-

rates the qualities of all interpretations into it. The quality [here] is the

quality of the text. When the text disappears, each interpreter returnsto [his own interpretation]. This is like the quality of each interpreter

being, in the lifetime of the messenger of God, incorporated into his

[the messenger’s] quality. If he affirms something it is fixed in his [the

interpreter’s] affirmation, and if he refuses something it is rejected [by

the interpreter].67

So the function of walå ya is intimately linked to mission. When the messenger

(or sun or text) is absent, sanctity (or stars or interpreters) appears in order to

take his place. The nature of this relationship is one in which the former nor-

mally incorporates the latter.

Our author goes on to explain that sanctity, after the disappearance of

Moses’prophetic mission, will assert itself and that his attendant has learned to

act properly toward it.

The quality of the saints among the Jews was, in the lifetime of

Moses, incorporated into his quality. Yet when his death approached,

and the sun of his mission disappeared behind the veil of his khalifawho would replace him, this khalifa being his attendant with whom

he went to see al-Kha∂ir, he [Moses] knew that the qualities of the

saints would appear in this attendant’s time. He [therefore] showed

him what his treatment of them should be when one of them appears

during his [the attendant’s] rule.68

Thus the attendant/khalifa has been taught how to deal with awliyå ’ after the

demise of the Prophet. >Al• Waf å’ restates the opening assertion that the lessonbehind the Qur’anic story is the relationship between walå ya and nubuwwa /

riså la: “He [Moses] united for him [the attendant] the two matters of mission

and sainthood . . . And he taught him that he must submit esoterically to the

saints, but if the law requires the rejection of something of their acts, then he

must reject it exoterically, so that those not at their station will not imitate their

qualities.”69 The model of Moses’ reaction to the shocking acts of Kha∂ir is

thus one to be followed. The saint is to be accorded his authority, but actions

which transgress the law should be challenged.

So in these discussions of the relationship of sanctity to prophecy we have

seen >Al• Waf å’ characterize prophecy as a following of the divine Command,

while sainthood is described as “working in God.” The implications of this

distinction are not explored, but it is not hard to see what is being indicated.

Prophets are burdened with a specific message, and their function is to dissem-

inate it to the community. Saints function not as bearers of a Command but




rather as the vehicle for the Command itself. Their actions are the form the

message takes. It is in the same vein that we are told the prophet has an earned

insight, while the saint’s is bestowed. Again, the assertion is left unexplored,but the point is an evocation of the view that prophets are chosen for their task

according to their upstanding piety (and social function), while saints come in

all shapes and sizes. Sanctity is bestowed according to God’s Will and cannot

be anticipated by human achievements.

We also saw, from the perspective of Moses’ attendant, that the quality of

sanctity is “in accord” with that of prophethood. This was explained through

the images of the sun incorporating the stars, the union of seas, and the text

holding all its interpretations. A picture is painted in which sanctity is a lesser

echo of prophecy. It is a stand-in for an original. The attendant’s lesson, after

all, was that both prophecy and sanctity are to be submitted to—the former

through adherence to the Law, and the latter esoterically.

Beyond this treatment of the relation between walå ya and nubuwwa, for

>Al• Waf å’ the figure of al-Kha∂ir plays a yet more important role. Simply put,

al-Kha∂ir is the spirit of walå ya. In his essence he is the inspiring Spirit, while

in his personification he is usually al-Kha∂ir but may take other forms. >Al•

Waf å’s discussion of al-Kha∂ir and Moses now takes a significant turn. No

longer is Moses simply the prophet bearing an exoteric revelation, but now hisown walå ya is being addressed. This turn should not surprise us since we have

seen the earlier discussions of Ibn >Arab• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’ on this very

point, that is, the presence within a prophet / messenger of sanctity. This scheme

was addressed partly as a response to the question of the superiority of prophecy

over sainthood. We saw that Ibn >Arab• first argured that walå ya is superior,

but only within a single person; a prophet’s sanctity is superior to his prophet-

hood, but a saint is inferior to a prophet. We also saw Mu˙ammad Waf å’s argu-

ment for this scheme, distinguishing between the two perspecives of esotericand exoteric walå ya. In the following discussion >Al• Waf å’ does not repeat

these discussions, he takes them for granted and elaborates on the presence of

walå ya in prophets and on the content of this walå ya.

Following the hierarchy of saints according to Ibn >Arab•, >Al• Waf å’ asserts

the presence in our physical world of two ever-living messengers, al-Kha∂ir and

Ilyås.70 These two, we are told, are the “spirits of inspiration” (arwå˙ al-ilhå m),

while the angels Gabriel and Michael are the spirits of revelation (wa y).71 The

only distinction offered between al-Kha∂ir and Ilyås is that the former is usu-

ally seen as the result of spiritual struggles (ÔHvˆh[¬), and the latter by spiritual

witnessing (ÔHvˆha¬). However, this distinction apparently disappears for those

who have a “perfect spirit, of both majesty and beauty.”72 Unfortunately the dis-

tinction between al-Kha∂ir and Ilyås is not developed, being all but abandoned

after this brief treatment.




Elsewhere the reader is directed along a more fruitful line of speculation.

The figure of Moses reappears, but this time the concern is with his sanctity.

First, the point is made that “for each saint there is a Kha∂ir who personifiesthe spirit of his sanctity. Likewise, for each prophet there is a form of Gabriel,

which personifies the spirit of his prophecy, and appears to his senses by his

own power.”73 >Al• Waf å’ seizes upon this al-Kha∂ir as the personification of

sanctity. He introduces the Qur’anic term Trust (amå na)74 in order to describe

the presence of walå ya within a prophet.

Know that al-Kha∂ir is the manifestation of what is hidden in the

Trust of Moses, from the Spirit of Lordship. Therefore, his [al-

Kha∂ir’s] external [acting] by which he manifested himself, wasinterpreted [in the Qur’ån] as belonging to the “footsteps” of Moses

and his attendant (hlˆNh´Ó ) (Q. 18:64), while [al-Kha∂ir’s inner reality]

is his being “one of the servants” of the essential Secret of unification

and of the blessing of Nearness. (Q. 18:65)75

So the “Spirit of Lordship” is the animating force behind the Trust. Details on

this Spirit are sparse, but it must be assumed that it is part of God’s participa-

tion in the contract that is the Trust. The point is also made that al-Kha∂ir is theform taken by the exteriorized Spirit, and as such appears as the “footsteps of

Moses and his attendant,” that is, appearing to them according to their own

abilities to perceive. This point is echoed as the passage continues:

The Praiseworthy, Independent Óaqq, disclosing Himself by this al-

Kha∂ir to Moses and his attendant as He manifested Himself through

His Spirit, sending it down to Mary as a well-formed man, said, “They

[Moses and the attendant] returned along their footsteps” to its [the

Spirit’s] manifestation, by which He [had] manifested to her, so they

would perceive him [as she did], by their bodily senses, as a well-

formed man: “So they found one of Our servants” [i.e. al-Kha∂ir] (Q.

18:65).76

Thus the personification that is al-Kha∂ir is simply one of many forms God

has taken in His Self-disclosing communications to humanity. Again, the

point is made that the form taken by the Spirit depends on the vision of its

intended witness. The personification of the Spirit is a sign fixed by him whowould receive it.

In this passage >Al• Waf å’ goes on to mention that Moses’ opposition to al-

Kha∂ir’s behaviour is due to this Trust. We are told that Moses “opposed him

[al-Kha∂ir] due to the nature of his [Moses’] Trust, and treated him as his




[Moses’] like.”77 From the human perspective of the Trust that Moses (and all

others) has assumed, it is clear that if he were to treat al-Kha∂ir like one who is

party to that contract, then objection to his behavior would be necessary. Of course in reality, the Spirit has not agreed to bear this Trust; certainly God does

not make contracts with Himself.

>Al• Waf å’ goes on to assert that this understanding between Moses and al-

Kha∂ir is the result of the Spirit’s explanation of the acts it carried out as al-

Kha∂ir. This Spirit is the same as that which appeared to Moses elsewhere.

When [Moses’] following [of al-Kha∂ir] ceased with “the interpretation

of that for which you were not able to have patience” (Q. 18:78) from

the governing of supremacy, because he [Moses] was at the level of the

Trust, he [al-Kha∂ir] explained to him the [significance of the] events.

The latter continued to unveil from the face of supremacy veils by his

speech, “I wanted” (Q. 18:79) and “You made holes” (Q. 18:71). Then

he said “We feared” (Q. 18:80) and “We wanted” (Q. 18:81), so that the

secret from its husk appeared to him [Moses] by his [al-Kha∂ir’s] say-

ing “Your Lord wanted that they should reach maturity and get their

treasure out (from under the wall); a mercy from your Lord. I did not

do it of my own accord” (Q. 18:82). Then it [the Spirit] informed him,as it appeared to him, by [the way he] put what he had done as coming

by his own accord and none other.78 By this it was known that this man-

ifestation [of the Spirit] is “the interpretation of that for which you

[Moses] were not able”—when it Self-disclosed upon the mountain—

“to bear.” (Q. 18:78)79

And so the shift from the personification of the Spirit to the Spirit itself is iden-

tified by the shift in language from the first-person singular to the first-personplural. This shift is also represented by the statement from al-Kha∂ir that he

has not acted of his own accord, and the interpretation supplied by the Spirit,

acting on its own. This Spirit is in fact the same Self-disclosure of God that

had previously overwhelmed Moses.80 The important difference is that here the

Self-disclosure is mediated as an interpretation; it is not al-Kha∂ir as an actor

but rather that which gives the true meaning of these acts.

>Al• Waf å’ follows this account with another example of the Spirit in a dif-

ferent time and place. Here it has taken the human form of the annunciating

messenger to Mary:

Likewise, the Spirit of the esoteric dominion of Jesus’ Trust mani-

fested to Mary as a well-formed man, saying according to its personi-

fication, “I am a messenger from your Lord; to you will be the gift of

a holy son” (Q. 19:19). And He made him a sign to the people and a




blessing from Him (cf. Q. 19:21). This was a completed matter when

he unveiled for her the face of the Creator (õ m;¬), by saying, “So [it

will be]. Your Lord has said ‘For Me that is easy.’” (Q. 19:21)81

This additional example of a prophetic Trust underlines an essential point

made in the account of Moses. The distinction is made between the personifi-

cation delivering a message and the Spirit—in its essential divine capacity—

thereafter supplying the esoteric meaning. In the case of both prophets, the

Spirit is personified, the message it delivers is challenged (by the doubting of

Moses and Mary), and finally the Spirit shifts into an exegetical mode for a

resolution. This last mode is the Spirit as the divine Self-disclosure, and here it

speaks as God in the first person.

In this exploration of the story of Moses and al-Kha∂ir, >Al• Waf å’ has pre-

sented a significant insight into the nature of walå ya. The figure of al-Kha∂ir

has been identified, along with other messengerlike figures, as simply the exo-

teric element of the Spirit of dominion. This exoteric message leads to the

advent of the esoteric Self-disclosure, which is the Spirit in full presence. The

implication here is that walå ya has two realities to it when it appears in this

world. The first, its exoteric reality, may be confusing or straightforward, but

its esoteric reality is that it represents a Self-disclosure of God. This Self-dis-closing Spirit, which >Al• Waf å’ elsewhere calls the “spirit of saintly inspira-

tion,” benefits both prophets and saints alike. It may be that for each prophet

there is a form of Gabriel and for each saint a Kha∂ir, but as we have seen,

prophets also benefit from one form or another of al-Kha∂ir, and more specifi-

cally the Spirit of sanctity, which animates him.

In this discussion our author has laid out a portrait of sanctity focusing on

the figure of al-Kha∂ir. In the Qur’anic story Moses appears as the champion

of exoteric knowledge, who is taught a lesson on the esoteric by one “whomWe have taught from Our Presence” (Q. 18:66). Yet in >Al• Waf å’s description

above, Moses is in the end accessing the spirit of walå ya. This spirit takes

many forms. In fact its personification is determined by the one viewing it. In

summary, >Al• Waf å’ describes a mode of divine communication parallel to that

of revelation. This is usually called “inspiration” (ilhå m), but the significant

point here is its clear identification as the Self-disclosure of God.

The Seal of Sainthood

Although >Al• Waf å’ has presented some interesting reflections on al-Kha∂ir,

walå ya, and Self-disclosure, he does not appear to have devoted the same cre-

ative energy to the idea of the Seal of sainthood. Much as it was for his father,

here the idea is accepted as common currency, and receives little direct attention.




Also, as we shall see, there is more attention payed to whom this Seal might be

than there is to the nature of the position.

While >Al• Waf å’ does not take up the theory of the Seal, he does make occa-sional mention of the office, comparing it to that of the Seal of the prophets.

After a discussion of the spheres of heaven, the prophets present in each, and

the kinds of revelation generated from each, we are told that along with each

revelation come leaders and gnostics of an era to interpret that revelation. >Al•

Waf å’ calls these gnostics “names.” They are to be distinguished from the Lordly

Names. We read,

And thus with the masters of each time (waqt ) are appearances of

names in addition to His Names. Their [the names’] appearances in

his [the master’s] time depend on whether his appearance is strong or

weak. As his appearance becomes strong, their appearance weakens;

and as his appearance weakens, theirs strengthens. The Mu˙ammadan

truth gave us a sign, saying, “My companions are like the stars”82 for

his appearance then was like that of the moon. His deputies and gnos-

tics were as numerous as the stars, but their appearance beside him

was as that of the stars beside the full moon. In the time ( zaman) of

the Seal of saints, there is a wal• among the number [i.e. the quintes-sence] of the saints of all time, but the appearance of his command is

like the sun, while their appearance beside him is like that of the stars

with the sun.83

The point is clear that as revelation is to be accompanied by its attendant sup-

porters, so too the command of the Seal of saints is supported by lesser figures,

that is, all previous saints. The description of the gnostics becoming more or

less apparent, depending on the presence of their master, is reminiscent of thediscussion we saw earlier in which prophecy is described as the sun that hides

the light of the stars/saints, but here it is turned to the advent of the Seal of

saints, who will (or at least the wal• of his time will) become the engulfing sun

to those diminutive stars.84

This association of the Seal of prophets with the Seal of saints is repeated

in another discussion, in which >Al• Waf å’ describes an enemy for each prophet.

In an echo of the Qur’anic statement, “We have made for each prophet an

enemy from among the sinners” (Q. 25:31), various Antichrists (Dajjål) are

identified: for Moses there was Pharaoh, for Abraham there was Nimrod, for

David, Goliath. However, for the Seal of prophets and the Seal of saints there

are no such opponents, since their levels are unique.85 The discussion is not

carried further, but the essential point is the identification of the unique posi-

tion shared by the two Seals.86




This relationship between the two Seals is also described as one in which

the Seal of sainthood stands in for the Prophet. We read,

The clear Truth said, in His Mu˙ammadan voice, by His necessary

partner-in-speech (F“Hm©HIldg;ƒ) to the possible hearer, that, “If God

willed, He would seal your heart.” (Q. 42:24). (But) if He wills, your

divine existence (Dˆ!!H ÚVm“M) is assigned to the rule of the Seal of

saints, sitting, by the Mercy of union, upon your heart. [This Seal]

exists thanks to the Seal of prophets . . . in a realm in which each saint

arises from the heart of a prophet.87

Thus, if an individual is to become a believer, God must place him or her under

the care of the Seal of saints, who is in turn tied to the Seal of prophets. The

passage continues from here, commenting on a Qur’anic passage dealing with

the human desire to see God.

“Do they wait” (Q. 2:210) that is, to see God so they know Him by

their own eyes to be God? “Only so God comes to them” that is, He

appears to them so they can know Him. “In the shadows of the

clouds” which are His becoming (|˚m… ) the master of the Divine Seal,who exists thanks to the proofs of His elucidations [text unclear] . . .

“The angels” are the forms of His Lordly Wise Rulings. “The matter

is thus decided” that is, finished. “And to God all things return” in

this encompassing fulfilling Seal.88

This passage is rather elusive, but the Seal here (whether he be of prophecy or

sanctity) plays an important theophanic role. As the ultimate seal he represents

the Divine through proofs and elucidations.Another brief mention is made of the two Sealhoods elsewhere. The

prophet Mu˙ammad said to >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib, “You are my brother in this

world and the next.”89 to which >Al• Waf å’ adds, “That is, in the time of the

Seal of prophecies and the time of the Seal of sainthoods.”90 An identification

is being made here of the Seal of prophets as this worldly, and the Seal of

saints as other worldly. We shall see shortly why >Al• Waf å’ would link the

afterlife with the era of the Seal of sainthood. The implication that >Al• ibn Ab•

ˇålib is the Seal of sainthood is also significant here.

Before moving on, we should take note of the figure of >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib.

Although the explicit doctrines of Sh•>ism (e.g., the role of Imåms, resentment

of the first three caliphs as usurpers) are absent from the writings of both

Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’, it should be said that their reverence for >Al•, who

has always been held in high esteem by most Sunni sufis, is clear. Drawing on




hadith literature, the following is representative of the role played by >Al• ibn

Ab• ˇålib among the Waf å’s.

In the hadith [it is said] “Ab¥ Bakr is from me at the station of hearing,

and >Umar at the station of seeing.” He [Mu˙ammad] accepted from

>Uthmån the pledge of allegiance by his noble hand. He said, “By

God, this is the hand of >Uthmån.”91 So >Uthmån is of him at the sta-

tion of the hand. He (Mu˙ammad) said, “Nothing is said on my

behalf, save by myself or >Al•.”92 for >Al• is his tongue, and the tongue

is the elite station for a speaker. Thus, said >Al•, “I am the greatest of

the upright (ßidd • q),” that is, he who is truthful to the Mu˙ammadan

Truth; “and none says this after me except a liar.”93

These reports present a picture in which >Al• is clearly more than simply one of

the caliphs. He is the intimate of the Mu˙ammadan Reality. In the Sunn• con-

text, one would certainly expect this ßidd • q akbar to be Ab¥ Bakr and not

>Al•.94

There are a few other references to >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib in the same vein

throughout the writings of >Al• Waf å’. Of these, one that goes beyond identify-

ing >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib simply as the Prophet’s intimate is a passage that alludesto the Seal of Mu˙ammadan sainthood. Sha>rån•’s editing, however, is probla-

matic. >Al• Waf å’ is reported to have said,

Verily, >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib was raised as Jesus was raised,95 and like-

wise he will descend as Jesus will. And I [al-Sha>rån•] have said on

this matter: >Al• al-Khawwåß [d. after 941/1543] said, “Verily, Noah

preserved from the Ark a plank with the name >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib on it,

riding upon it to heaven. It remains preserved in the Chest of poweruntil >Al• is raised.” God knows best of all this.96

Again, although we would like our author to expand on this point, we can nev-

ertheless follow his inferences. It is clear that in claiming >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib

was not killed in 661 A.D., but rather raised alive to God, >Al• Waf å’ is going

beyond what would be expected of a non-Sh•>ite sufi. This assertion that both

Jesus and >Al• will return—presumably at the end of time and as the Seal of

general sainthood—is a conflation of the Sunni and Sh•>ite positions.97 Also,

the question must be asked as to how one office may be held by two separatefigures. Perhaps our author is assigning the role of Messiah to one and that of

the Seal of general sainthood to the other. This analysis is only conjecture and

would need to be confirmed by further evidence. The quotation that follows,

ostensibly from >Al• al-Khawwåß, is colorful and certainly sounds pro->Alid.

The significant statement here is that >Al• will some day be raised to God, pre-




sumably after the Resurrection. This, however, is at odds with the original

claim that >Al• was not killed and has already been raised. The quotation from

>Al• al-Khawwåß seems to miss entirely the point intended by Sha>rån•. Leavingaside >Al• al-Khawwåß, for more detail on all this we should look to >Al•

Waf å’s own writings. From a reconstruction of Sha>rån•’s sources (here the

Waßå yå of >Al• Waf å’) it is clear that his account is only partially accurate. In

its original, the passage Sha>rån• is paraphrasing mentions the return of Jesus

and >Al• but is silent on either one being raised. This discussion begins with a

recognition that the soul (nafs) lives on after the death of the body, awaiting

the command to “return,” one assumes as part of the Day of Ressurection. >Al•

Waf å’ then says, “This is the Return (raja> a) by which are awaited the like-

nesses of Jesus and >Al•.”98 Sha>rån•’s presentation seems to be making an

effort at solving a problem he sees in the original passage. The problem is that

this Return has been mentioned in light of general statements on the soul’s

continued existence after death. It is clear to us now that Sha>rån• wanted to put

a sharper point on the matter. He did this first by taking the satements on Jesus

and >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib out of context; second by completing the drama with a

bodily raising. The second is not a far reach for the reader, due to the Islamic

doctrine of the prophet Jesus having been raised whole. For what he thought

would be good measure, Sha>rån• has padded his presentation with a quotefrom his shaykh. Despite this creative editing, it must be noted that >Al• Waf å’s

own position is only mildly pro->Alid. This apocalyptic appearance of the

“likenesses of Jesus and >Al•” is a refence to the final Seal(s) of sainthood; a

reference that does not hold >Al• to have been taken up like Jesus. It does, how-

ever, leave the door open to >Al• playing some part in the End time. Unfortu-

nately, this seems to be the only mention >Al• Waf å’ makes of >Al• ibn Ab•

ˇålib in this context. His use of the term “likeness” (mathal) is unusual and

intriguing.99

Despite this association of Jesus and >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib with the great

“Return,” the question of the identity of the Seal of saints is answered defini-

tively by >Al• Waf å’ elsewhere in a number of places. We shall see below that

>Al• Waf å’ identifies himself as the holder of this office, arguing that the cycles

of great saints have come to an end with him. Before turning to these discus-

sions, however, we should note a few other passages that deal directly with the

identity of the Seal, without touching on these cycles. At the end of the follow-

ing passage >Al• Waf å’ is identified as the Seal of saints, but in getting to this

identification the lofty position he accords to this Seal in relation to the pre-

Mu˙ammadan prophets is noteworthy.

Assenting (taßd • q) is a quality; and most of what occurs by this qual-

ity is according to seeing or reporting. Verification (ta˙q• q) is the

quality which as a primary certitude is not by acts of observation by




the senses, nor by the intellects. This is like the faith of Ab¥ Bakr

and >Umar, which had no need of a [miraculous] “breaking of the

norm” or investigation. The Seal of the prophets said to Ab¥ Bakr “Iam the Messenger of God” (cf. Q. 7:158). He [Ab¥ Bakr] found cer-

tainty in this, and accepted it. And >Umar heard al-Óaqq say to him,

“To Him belongs that which is in the heavens and the earth, and what

is between them and what is under the soil.” (Q. 20:6). He too found

certainty in this, and accepted it. This is Assenting of Verification,

and not Assenting by demonstration. This has occured for none of

the followers of the prophets, except for the elect [followers] of the

Seal of prophets. Likewise this occured for none of the followers of

the saints, except the followers of the Seal of saints, since he [the

Seal of saints] is upon the heart of the Seal of prophets. The elite are

on the heart of the elite. So the companions of the Seal of prophets

have Verification, and the companions of the prophets who were

sealed are all in [a state of] Assenting, while the companions of the

Seal of saints are in Verification.

I was told, in 795 AH, the following: “O >Al•, the companions of

the saints are all in Assenting, while your companions are in Verifica-

tion. God is the Most-high and Most-knowing.100

Assenting is defined as that which is seen or reported, in other words, the reli-

gious Law or prophetic admonitions. In distinction, Verification is the unseen

quality of the saints. The stress here is on the contrast between the realm of the

seen, ordinary acquired knowledge (i.e. prophetic), and that of the unseen,

intuitive, special knowledge (i.e. saintly). The companions of the Prophet did

not need the exoteric evidentiary proof of a “breaking of the norm,”101 rather,

by Verification they were connected to him. This spiritual association is uniqueto the companions of the Seals of prophecy and sainthood. The status thus

accorded the companions of the Seal of sainthood is superior, at least spiritually,

to that of the companions of pre-Mu˙ammadan prophets. It is worth repeating

that the Sealhoods share an esoteric reality—which as we also saw in the above

discussions of al-Kha∂ir and Moses, is walå ya. As for the identity of the Seal of

saints, the short statement which puts into parallel the followers of >Al• Waf å’

with those of the Prophet, points clearly to him as the Seal of sainthood.

However, making this relatively clear picture more cloudy, elsewhere we

find Mu˙ammad Waf å’ described as the “Master of the Greatest Seal.” Thisterm is peculiar, since from the context it is clearly equivalent to the office of

the Seal of saints. >Al• Waf å’ tells us,

In reality our teacher is the Master of the Greatest Seal (L jüH Fπh∑

L z¨!H), and al-Shådhil• along with all the other saints [before] are sim-




ply the soldiers of his kingdom, followers of his lead. Surely he who

is among the troops is not the one in command! It is our teacher who

commands; he is not subject to command in the other circles [either],since he is the secret of the Seal of the prophets, and the inheritor of

his perfection. As all the prophets are followers of their Seal, . . . like-

wise all the saints are followers of, and are guided by, their Seal. 102

The description of Mu˙ammad Waf å’ as the inheritor of the perfection of the

Prophet clearly echoes the earlier identification of the two Sealhoods as the

exclusive sources for Verification. Noteworthy also is the assertion here that as

the Seal of prophecy encompasses all previous nubuwwa, so the Seal of saint-

hood encompasses all previous walå ya.

The Seal and the Renewer of Religion

We saw in our discussions of walå ya from Ibn >Arab• and Tirmidh• that sanc-

tity may be seen to have a linear progression. That is, nubuwwa is established

in two forms (tashr •> and >å mma), the former being sealed before the latter;

walå ya, in its two forms (Mu˙ammadiyya and å mma) is also sealed at sequen-tial points in history. This scheme, as we have seen, is adopted incompletely by

both the father Waf å’ and his son. One problem, from their perspective as later

inheritors of Ibn >Arab•, was surely this linear aspect of walå ya, which had

identified Ibn >Arab• as the Seal of Mu˙ammadan sainthood, leaving only Gen-

eral sainthood to be sealed by Jesus, marking the apocalypse. How was >Al•

Waf å’ to situate himself and his saintly father within this universe? Mu˙ammad

Waf å’, having been held up as superior to Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•, certainly

merited a loftier station than one that simply put him in the line someherebetween the Seal of Mu˙ammadan sainthood and the final Seal of General

sainthood. We saw at the end of chapter 5 that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ inserted the

tradition of the Renewer of religion into the equation of walå ya, while at the

same time blurring the categories of general and Mu˙ammadan sainthood,

resulting in a cyclical walå ya championed by seven great saints, to be com-

pleted by an eighth. This is modeled on the seven prophets of the seven levels

of heaven visited by the Prophet in his ascension. >Al• Waf å’ takes up his

father’s arguments, refining and updating the final cycle. Also, he relies on the

Renewer-of-religion tradition to make the time line cyclical, but ending at one

point. Like his father, he also seems to abandon any clear distinction between

General and Mu˙ammadan sainthood.

>Al• Waf å’ presents his interpretation of the cycles of sanctity in two

places. In the first he opens with a description of the seven heavens, each of

which is home to a prophet:




It is said in the hadith of Mu˙ammad’s night journey (isr å ) that he

found Adam in the first heaven, the sphere of the moon . . . It men-

tions that he found in each heaven one of the ‘¥l•

al-> azm (holders of

resolution) i.e. the seven messengers. They are Adam, Noah, Abra-

ham, Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus. It also mentions that he found

Adam, Abraham, Moses and Jesus in person, while the guarantors

are also mentioned: Idr•s for Noah, . . . Joseph for David, Aaron for

Solomon.103

The sequence of prophets given here is identical to that given by Mu˙ammad

Waf å’ in his discussion of the cycles of prophecy.104 There, however, the

prophets were not identified as the inhabitants of the seven heavens. These

three guarantors mentioned, in the usual account of the Prophet’s ascension,

are prophets occupying their own heavens. Unfortunately >Al• Waf å’ does not

elaborate on their roles. A detailed study of the medieval mi> r å j literature

would allow us to comment on the significance of these figures. At this point,

our author goes on to say that the various commands and laws sent down

through each of these prophets are particular to that prophet’s time and place,

that is, to the receptive capacity of the audience.105 Later, he describes how the

divine Command present in each cycle of the seven prophets is subsumed bythe Command descended to the following cycle. We are told that each prophet’s

message is included in, and abrogated by, that of his successor. Significantly, in

this description the Seal of the prophets is followed by the Seal of saints.

Thus what descended to Noah includes what came down to Adam,

and a special addition. Likewise Abraham [included all that was] with

Noah, and Moses that of Abraham, David that of Moses, Solomon

that of David, Jesus that of Solomon, since he includes all that pre-ceded him, along with his special addition. Then came Mu˙ammad

as the Seal of prophecies, according to the benefiting dispositions of

the eighth sphere of stars, the sphere of [God’s] Footstool. He came

with everything those before him had, but with a special addition, as

he came as Seal of saints bringing what is suitable for the benefiting

disposition from the ninth sphere of A†las,106 the sphere of the Throne.

Because he brought a governing suitable for the governing of the

sphere of the fixed stars, and they [the earlier prophets] brought accord-

ing to the governings of the spheres of the planets, their laws are subject to abrogation, while his [the Prophet’s] is not.107

So the succession of prophets, each bearing a divine communication, contin-

ued down to the time of the Prophet, being included therein and thus abro-

gated. Mention is made of the Prophet here in two aspects; the first, located in




the sphere of the Footstool, represents his prophetic function, while the second,

at the ninth sphere (that of the immutable Throne), represents his saintly func-

tion. From here >Al• Waf å’ explains that the eighth sphere is the mediator of alldivine Aid or Command coming from the ninth. He also tells us that through

the ninth sphere, the Prophet is the source of all sanctity.

Since the quality of the ninth sphere is inseparable from the esoteric

of the quality of the eighth sphere, then Mu˙ammad, the Seal of

prophethoods, reaches the [position of] opener of sainthoods, announc-

ing the immutable Verification. His time contains what all earlier

times contain, for the learned of his community are like the prophets

of other times.108

We see here the distinction between Mu˙ammad’s prophetic and saintly roles,

being represented as different spheres. This discussion does not develop the

point much, but it is clear that the Prophet’s walå ya is superior to his nubuwwa.

>Al• Waf å’ now introduces the notion of the Renewer of religion, with the

result that these prophets come to be represented by a pole every century. Each

prophet—according to the Waf å’ roster, and not that of the traditonal accounts

of the Prophet’s ascension—has had an identifiable representative at one timeon earth, with that of Mu˙ammad being the last.

“God raises at the start of each century one who renews for this com-

munity its religion.” Understand, each century a pole comes down

with a quality (L …π) appropriate to the predisposition of the people of

his time. It is known thereby that the poles are equivalent to the

“holders of resolution,” and that they [the poles] are their [the

prophets’] inheritors. The first [pole] corresponds to Adam and wassent down on the day of the Farewell pilgrimage;109 for time on [that]

day turned back to a situation [like that of the] day God created the

heavens and the earth. And the master of the second century is on the

heart of Noah . . . and likewise [are the poles] from one-hundred to

eight-hundred years, until the Mu˙ammadan pole, the Seal of the

saints . . . The teacher Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil• [d. 658 AH] was the

pole of the seventh time; and the great completing speaker came

down as the Seal of sainthoods in the eighth time.110

Thus the Renewer of religion presented at the head of each century is here

identified as the pole. These poles, as we saw in Ibn >Arab• and elsewhere, are

described as the inheritors of their particular prophets. It is interesting to see

here >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib alluded to as the first pole, identified with Adam. >Al•

Waf å’ also identifies directly the pole of the seventh time, al-Shådhil•.111 The




Mu˙ammadan pole, the Seal of saints, is not named, but he is described as the

“great completing speaker” (Dªh†m©HLZ¨!HR≈hk©H). The last adjective is an uncom-

mon modifer in Sufi terminology, so it seems likely that it has been chosenspecifically to evoke the name Waf å’. The fact that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ died in

765 A.H. also makes him the most likely candidate as the Renewer of the

“eighth time.”112

Elsewhere we read of the seven prophets sealed by an eighth, and seven

poles sealed by their eighth. This passage begins with the hadith report of the

Renewer:

“God raises, at the start of every one-hundred years, a man by whom

He renews this religion.” This man is the pole. We also read in the

hadith that, “God places each saint upon the heart of a prophet.” The

“holders of resolution” are the poles of the prophets, and they are

seven, with Mu˙ammad as their Seal, the eighth. As for the poles of

the saints, the eighth is their Seal, and is upon the heart of the Seal of

prophets.113

Here again, the identification is made of the Renewer as the pole.114 It appears

that the “holders of resolution” are the seven prophets we saw in the passagequoted above. They are described here as “the poles of the prophets.” This may

be an unusual choice in terminology, but from the context it is clear who these

individuals are. Perhaps the term is used because it echoes well the phrase pole

of the saints. Again, the prophets are sealed by Mu˙ammad, their eighth, while

their appointed saints are sealed by an eighth also. At this point in the text, >Al•Waf å’ embarks upon some rather convoluted calculations, switching back and

forth between lunar and solar years, in a reckoning that ends with the current

date, that is, 799a.h

., as the beginning of the final century. This century willbe followed by the appearance of the Dajjål and the Mahdi. We are told,

For each of them [the poles] there are one-hundred years by a reckon-

ing of 360 days. This hundred years began its cycle three months

before his [the Prophet’s] death.115 Writing this, we are in the morning

of the fourth of Rab•> al-Åkhir, year 799 by lunar reckoning . . . When

this, the eighth time, ends, the ninth appears, and is the century of the

signs of the Hour. Its [the Hour’s] signal is the full appearance of the

Mahdi, and the Dajjål leaves and Jesus appears. The sun rises in theWest, and the people receive what the Truthful [i.e. God] has

promissed them [in Scripture of the hereafter], so they come to see.

And this is extended over two-hundred years; the first is the Mu˙am-

madan century, and the second is the century of Jesus. By this, this




[prophetic] cycle (dawr ) ends and a new one arrives, in which the

[divine] Commands are realized.116

Apparently >Al• Waf å’ is writing at the end of the eighth time and is about to

witness the start of the century of the signs of the End of Time. These signs

include the appearance of the Mahdi, Dajjål, and Jesus.117 Elsewhere we are

told that the eighth century will produce a saint of Mu˙ammadan sainthood

and that the “second time” ( zaman thå n• ) will only begin after the turn of the

ninth century.118 It should be noted here that >Al• Waf å’ has followed his father

in treating the Renewer tradition as an eschatological schedule. In light of the

Landau-Tasseron study, this treatment is unusual if not unique to the teachings

of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’. As noted in the previous chapter, this theory of

cyclical time is reminiscent of Ismå>•l• doctrine.119

We saw in the previous chapter that Mu˙ammad Waf å’s reckoning of the

centuries, as >Al•’s calculations do, point to himself as a fulfillment of the eighth

cycle and thus a sign of the End. >Al• Waf å’, in a dramatic allusion to his father’s

eschatological import, describes an earthquake at the time of his birth (at the start

of the eighth century hijra), which marked the descent of the Word by the “Seal

of the circle of the sainthood of oneness.” The event is described thus:

The greatest and loftiest of words is the Word (kalima) of the Lord of

the single Mu˙ammadan existence, which was revealed with the Seal

of the circle of the sainthood of oneness, since that is its [essential]

meaning. It is the fulfilling word (]∂m†M ]lg… ) which when it was revealed

to the earth through the generative laying down of an existentiating

inspiration (hd˚hd… hdπM) in the pre-dawn of Thursday the third of Dh¥al-Óijja, 702 AH, the entire earth quaked at the time of the >°d prayer120

on that day. This was as al-Óaqq informed [us], in the sura, which thePerfect Sayyid called the Announcer . . . [text unclear] And he made it

as half of the Qur’an as he compared himself to a brick in the

prophetic house. God said, “When the Earth is shaken to its [utmost]

convulsion, and the Earth throws up its burdens [from within], and

humanity cries [distressed]: “What is the matter with it?” On that Day

will it declare its tidings; for that thy Lord will have given it inspira-

tion. On that Day will men proceed in companies sorted out, to be

shown the deeds that they [have done] . . . (Q. 99:1–6).121

This description matches closely the statement, quoted at the end of chapter 5

above, made by Mu˙ammad Waf å’ to the effect that “the master of the eighth

time is the Seal of the age, and the eye of total union, the abode of the Great

Tiding.” Here, the Word descends with the Seal of sainthood, being somehow




the circle of sainthood’s meaning. The character of this Word is interesting, as

it is a generative inspiration—having produced Mu˙ammad Waf å’—which

will descend to earth again at the end of Time. We may understand this gener-ative character as the force that has produced the Seal on the third of Dh¥ al-

Óijja.122 Unfortunately >Al• Waf å’ does not here expand on the title Perfect

Sayyid, but it would seem to be the prophet Mu˙ammad since he has com-

pared himself to a brick in the prophetic house.123 The Seal of sainthood, at

least according to Ibn >Arab•, would have been represented by two bricks, one

silver and one gold.124 The text itself is unclear, but this verse of the apocalyp-

tic earthquake seems to be to revelation what the prophet Mu˙ammad was to

prophecy. Nevertheless, the passage is clearly tying together the Word, the Seal

of saints, the date 702 a.h., and the beginning of the End.

>Al• Waf å’ returns to this apocalyptic reckoning elsewhere. He describes a

hidden Seal of sainthoods who appears in 702 a.h. and signals a final era,

which will be closed by a “coming of God.” We are told that the Seal of saint-

hoods (or Geatest seal) is an “unseen” that was not manifested at the time of

the Prophet. This manifestation occurs only in the “time of sainthoods,” with

the “completing” (]∂h†m©H) sainthood manifesting itself in 702 a.h. This marks an

era that will end in 823 a.h. “The time of this most holy manifestation is fixed

by God. The years of this manifestation are counted as the Seven oft-repeatedand the suras of the Qur’ån ; that is, 121 (i.e. 7+114). 702 plus 121 gives 823

a.h. Then God will come after this, as He wills, for ‘God is All-encompassing

and All-knowing.’”125 In al-Maså mi> al-rabbå niyya (65a) the year 823 is also

reached, but through a much more convoluted reckoning. Nevertheless, this

speculation on the era of the Great seal proved to be inaccurate. As we know,

>Al• Waf å’ died in 807 a.h., his brother Shihåb al-D•n in 814, and the third

khalifa of the order, Ab¥ al-Fat˙ Mu˙ammad, in 852. The reference to Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’s birthday in 702 is clear, but why >Al• Waf å’ would have his calcu-lations point to 823 a.h. remains a mystery.

As we saw earlier, >Al• Waf å’s interpretation of the Renewer, combined

with the cycle of eight prophets and their saintly poles, not surprisingly,

pointed to himself as the final seal. His calculations were made as of the year

795 a.h., but we also have an account of a dramatic inspiration received four

years later. He says,

I received an inspiration (ilhå m) in the year 799 a.h., which was not

from my imagination, which said, “O >Al•, We have chosen you to

resurrect the souls from the tombs of their bodies. If We have com-

manded you, then take heed!” “And follow not the desires of those

who know not. They will be of no use to you in the sight of God. It is

only wrongdoers [that stand as] protectors (awliyå ’), one to another,

but God is the Protector (wal• ) of the righteous” (Q. 45:18–19).126




This resurrecting makes little sense on its own unless it is read in light of >Al•

Waf å’s earlier claims to being the Seal of sainthood and final Renewer. If the

ninth “time” is the last, then its Renewer certainly must play an important role.While in the hereafter humanity will be resurrected in both body and soul,

according to this inspiration >Al• Waf å’ will raise the souls from their bodies.

This statement is dramatic in its resonances, but without further direct com-

ment on the nature of this “resurrecting,” it may best be taken metaphorically,

as a reference to the spiritual mission of the Seal or the Renewer.

Also suggestive of an apocalyptic drama is the title Lord of Time, or Íå˙ib

al-Zamå n. This title, usually reserved for the awaited Hidden Imåm of the

Twelver Sh•>a, is certainly unexpected in a Sunn• context.127 The Hidden Imåm

may also be referred to as the “Mahdi.”128 However, >Al• Waf å’ does not use

the epithet in the context of the signs of the End of Time. During a discussion

of the variety of forms in creation, the Lord of Time is described as the catalyst

for the First Intellect: “The First Intellect is the Rational faculty of the Lord of

Time. The effusor of the forms [of creation] is his sensory spirit. The rest of the

[lower] levels are to be similarly understood.”129 By this characterization, the

Lord of Time is indeed the primary mode of differentiation for the One moving

into the realm of the Many. This function is identical to that of the Mu˙am-

madan Reality. In the same vein is the following presentation of the Lord of Time, but here an aspect of progression is added.

The Lord of each Time is to his people a self-disclosure of their

encompassing existence by the entity that is his discerning truth . . . He

is in his essence (bi-> aynihi) their Necessary, and they his possibilities

. . . The Lord of each Time is greater than what was self-disclosed to

the Lord of Time before him . . . thus one is prostrated to by the people

of his time, yet he in turn prostrates to the Lord of Time who is afterhim.130

The only other use of “Lord of Time” I have found in the writings of >Al• Waf å’

is in line with this usage. We are told in a wider discussion of the Signs of God,

“The Lord of every Time is God’s greatest Sign therein, for his existent is the

greatest Sign by which His existence appears there.”131 There is no clearly

appocalyptic element here. At most one might argue that the Mahdi/Lord of

Time would certainly command this role described, but the passage is treating

not a single event (or even person), but rather, the forms of the Mu˙ammadanReality or perhaps even the Seals of sainthood.

In a similar vein is >Al• Waf å’s use of another epithet, the Master of Time

(Íå˙ib al-waqt ). This figure appears to have no function beyond that we have

seen ascribed elsewhere to the pole of the age.132 In the following passage he is

noted for his unique access to God and his spiritual superiority. We read,




Know that the Heralding Reality in each age is the Master of its/his

Time. “Say: My way is to supplicate to God in sureness; I and those

who follow me.” (Q. 12:108) Its mark is that their elucidations andtheir accounts are by his unveiling and elucidation. He is distinguished

from them by the fact that they have no way to it without His Aid and

Effusion.133

The “Master of Time” (i.e., the Prophet in this case) provides the followers of

religion with understanding that is normally beyond their reach. He is, like the

most general understanding of the power of a saint, the channel for beneficent

divinity.

Another use of “Master of Time” is one that describes Reality progressing

through various “Times.” We are told that in each Time a Master is present

both esoterically and exoterically, but the Time following this brings either an

interpretation or inspiration that provides the given esoteric with an exoteric.

Thus, the Master of each Time is a new insight upon the previous Master, or

form of Reality. First, this gnostic has an esoteric and an exoteric element,

The interpretation (ta’w• l) of the former is the sending-down (tanz• l)

of the latter, and likewise for the Master of each Time. His exoteric isthe esoteric of the Master of the preceeding Time. This is because all

of them are one Reality appearing at each Time as the meaning

according to the perfections of the preparedness of that Time134 . . .

[Thus] the clear Reality is self-determined at each Time according to

the perfections of that Time.135

The significance of the Master of the Time is that he openly represents the spir-

itual message of the previous form taken by the Reality. It appears according tothe capacity of every time, and the Master of that Time is its esoteric reality.

For our purposes, the important point here is that the “Master of Time” is used

here by >Al• Waf å’ for a figure who functions to differentiate the oneness of

Reality. This is at odds with its use elsewhere (particulary the Sh•>ite context)

signaling a specific figure in the drama of the Apocalypse.

By way of a short concluding remark, we note first in this chapter the

attention paid by >Al• Waf å’ to the notions of Oneness and differentiation.

While holding to the basic tenent that there is no true reality beyond that of

God, the Necessary, recognition must also be made of His Self-disclosure.

These two realms, while categorically exclusive, must be simultaneously

upheld. This is the challenge of a mystical vision of the “All.” We also saw

rather dramatic development of the relationship between the spiritual guide




and his follower. The existential reality of the shaykh was of primary impor-

tance here. This teacher not only reflects the divine Self-disclosures, but what

is more important, he is a door for the follower to his own share in Necessaryexistence. The follower may find the Eternal in himself, but this, strangely

enough, is not a short path. In fact, it is only through the teacher that he may

find this in himself. We also saw that >Al• Waf å’s understanding of sanctity is

very much tied up with the idea of prophecy. He distinguishes between the

prophet carrying the Command and the saint acting as the medium of that

Command. Beyond this, he takes up the figure of al-Kha∂ir, whom he identi-

fies as a form of the Spirit of inspiration. This Spirit addresses the walå ya of

both saints and prophets. And finally, of a more practical concern, we saw that

>Al• Waf å’, like his father before him, claims to be the Seal of sainthood. By

using the tradition of the Renewer of religion, he builds up a cyclical interpre-

tation of this Sealhood and ties it into the signs of the End of Time.




The goal of this study has been to explore the idea of sainthood as it developed

within the mystical philosophy of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’. For these two

eighth/fourteenth-century Cairene sufis the idea of sanctity was important, yetwe have seen that a number of related concepts serve as a supporting frame-

work. A qualified “Oneness of Being,” God’s Self-disclosure, the nature of spiri-

tual guidance, and the cycles of the centuries are all elements tying together a

conceptual web.

We saw that this father and son were uniquely positioned between the

school of Ibn >Arab• and the sufi order of the Shådhiliyya. In general, we may

say that Waf å’ mystical thought represents an integration of the Akbarian con-

cept of sainthood into the tradition of order-based sufism. This Waf å’iyyaorder was at once a branch of the Shådhiliyya and a continuation of the school

of mystical speculation established by Ibn >Arab•. More specifically, this new

order served as a vehicle for the elaboration of Ibn >Arab•’s theories on saint-

hood. Not only did the Waf å’s expand on the theoretical dimensions of walå ya,

but they also used it to define and advance their own claims to sanctity. The

shift from theory into detailed identifications and theories on the End repre-

sents a turning point in the history of the Akbarian tradition and a departure

from that of the early Shådhiliyya. The Waf å’ hybrid also marks an introduc-

tion of Akbarian sanctity into tar • qa-based sufism.The Akbarian philosophy embraced by the Waf å’s, however, did not lead to

an open incorporation of Ibn >Arab• into the wider Shådhiliyya order. The early

Shådhiliyya was neither hostile to nor enthusiastically supportive of Ibn >Arab•.

Historically, this ambiguous posture seems to have persisted. Further study

would be needed of the transmission of Ibn >Arab•’s teachings among latter

Conclusion



medieval mystics for us to judge the wider importance of the Waf å’s as trans-

mitters. It is hoped this research, through exploring walå ya and its related con-

cepts within the Waf å’iyya, has made this next step possible.As we saw, the Waf å’iyya both distinguished itself from the Shådhiliyya

order and honored its founder, al-Shådhil•. In the hagiographical accounts, the

second khalifa of that order is made to recognize Mu˙ammad Waf å’s spiritual

superiority, while >Al• Waf å’ himself names al-Shådhil• as the pole of his age.

Elsewhere, however, al-Shådhil• is clearly subordinated as foot soldier under a

Waf å’ spiritual command. This ambiguous relationship (at once drawing recog-

nition from, yet claiming to surpass) is to be expected in light of what the

Waf å’iyya was itself. The most accurate characterization would be to describe

the Waf å’iyya as a mix of the Akbarian and Shådhilite traditions. The former

brought with it refined concepts of ontology and sanctity (along with a liberating

hermeneutic style), while the latter supplied the important initiatic and spiritual

credentials associated with affiliation to the early Shådhil• shaykhs. Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ not so much cut himself off from his Shådhilite shaykh Ibn Båkhilå

but rather left him behind when he decided to initiate his own new branch of

the Shådhiliyya, one that included an Akbarian perspective.

The full implications of the Waf å’s for later sufism will have to be taken

up in later research, since our goal here has been the more preliminary one of fully describing their teachings. We saw in our first chapter that the roots of spec-

ulation on sanctity were set early on in the writings of the third/ninth-century

figure al-Óak •m al-Tirmidh•. His was the first sustained effort at fleshing out

the levels of sainthood. In his model, the Seal of saints crowned a hierarchy

consisting of the “True saints of God,” under whom there were the “Saints of

God’s Truth.” With Ibn >Arab• four centuries later, the Seal of saints took on

a new dimension. The key innovation here was the introduction of a “Univer-

sal prophecy” distinct from the usual “Legislative prophecy.” The Seal of thelatter was the prophet Mu˙ammad, but the former, which is itself divided

into Universal and Mu˙ammadan sanctity, is sealed first by Ibn >Arab• him-

self and then finally by the returning apocalyptic Jesus. This concept of a

Universal prophecy served as a bridge between the realms of sanctity and

prophecy. In short, it extended the idea of sanctity upward, making it an inte-

gral element of prophecy (i.e., sanctity is present within prophecy as its Uni-

versal ahistorical form).

Our attention then turned to the early Shådhiliyya and its understanding

of walå ya, particularly through the writings of Ibn >A†å’ Allåh al-Iskandar•and his little-studied follower Ibn Båkhilå. The former was certainly the most

important elaborator of the theory of sanctity for the order. His understanding

of walå ya was based on a two-tiered model, which distinguished between

Greater and Lesser walå ya. These categories resembled those presented by al-

Tirmidh•, in that they represent a walå ya divinely bestowed and a walå ya




achieved through spiritual self-discipline. Ibn >A†å’ Allåh’s formulation, how-

ever, stresses that in its lesser form walå ya exists potentially in everyone and

that one’s spiritual progress is the measure of the development of one’s Lesserwalå ya.

We saw that Ibn Båkhilå’s contribution to the theory of sainthood centered

around the idea of God’s Self-disclosure (tajall• ) taking various forms, depend-

ing on the perspective of the viewer. Thus both revelation to prophets and inspi-

ration to saints are one in essence. The specific form of this Self-disclosure is

determined by the function held by him who receives it, an insight that would

be echoed by Mu˙ammad Waf å’. Ibn Båkhilå’s understanding of sainthood is

rooted in this insight, as is his explanation of the different functions and levels

of supplication.

This discussion of the early Shådhiliyya concluded that these formulations

served to extend the prophetic role into the postprophetic world through the

saints. That is, the saints inherit from the messengers and prophets, serving as

their substitutes. In fact, their function is to make known the communications

from the Mu˙ammadan Reality—of course not in its legal or literal forms, but

rather from its esoteric side. For the sake of comparison, we characterized this

as a downward movement of the function of prophecy. Sanctity is thus here the

lesser continuation of prophecy. In contrast, we characterized Ibn >Arab•’s systemas an upward extension of walå ya; the central insight here being that walå ya is

an integral part of prophecy.

In chapter 5 we saw that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ follows Ibn >Arab• in some

important ways. He describes two kinds of sanctity. One he characterizes as exo-

teric (Moseslike) and the other as esoteric (Kha∂ir-ian). These two forms reflect

the distinction made by Ibn >Arab• between Legislative prophecy (nubuwwa

tashr •> ) and Universal prophecy (nubuwwa >å mma or walå ya). Further, Mu˙am-

mad Waf å’ follows Ibn >Arab•’s argument that the former is superior to the latter,when both are considered within one person; however, Legislative prophecy is

superior when in one person it is compared to the Universal prophecy present

in another individual. Yet Mu˙ammad Waf å’ does differ significantly in that he

does not adopt the distinction between the two kinds of nubuwwa >å mma (the

Mu˙ammadan and Universal). For Ibn >Arab• this distinction provided two

streams of sainthood to be sealed, the first by Ibn >Arab• himself, and the sec-

ond by Jesus. For Mu˙ammad Waf å’ this is reduced to only one Seal, who

functions as the vehicle for God’s Word on earth. This function is a significant

innovation. Also important is the introduction of a cyclical timeline. Adaptingthe tradition of God appointing at the start of each century a renewer of reli-

gion (mujaddid ), Mu˙ammad Waf å’ presents a line of seven cycles, each last-

ing a century and each being informed by a great saint. These saints are, like

the Seal, described as “unifiers” of God’s Word, including the Qur’an. The

final cycle in the line is the eighth, who will be living in the year 800 a.h. This

Conclusion 159



version of the Seal of saints thus includes the apocalyptic function held by

Jesus, as Seal of Universal walå ya in the Ibn >Arab• model.

>Al• Waf å’s contribution to the theory of sainthood is an extension of thatof his father. He follows him in distinguishing between Moseslike and Kha∂ir-

ian walå ya, but he takes the figure of al-Kha∂ir one step further. Through a

lengthy discussion of the Qur’anic story of Moses and the enigmatic al-Kha∂ir,

>Al• Waf å’ argues that the figure of al-Kha∂ir is merely one of many possible

forms of the Self-disclosing divine Spirit. Thus, the strange actions of al-Kha∂ir

are in reality the workings of this Spirit. More significantly, however, this

Spirit animates part of the Trust that constitutes the office of prophet. This

assertion makes sense in light of the fact that Mu˙ammad Waf å’, and Ibn

>Arab• before him, had clearly established the presence of both prophecy and

sanctity within a single person. Thus the Spirit, according to >Al• Waf å’, is not

only al-Kha∂ir who inspires saints, but it also plays an essential role in the

walå ya within the office of prophet.

>Al• Waf å’s speculations on sainthood, which have taken up certain appar-

ently Ismå>•l• elements such as the nå† iq and the dawr , included arguments

concerning the identity of the Seal. In his spiritual cosmology, there were eight

cycles of prophets, who were each represented by a saint (or pole) of the era.

This figure also functions as that century’s renewer (mujaddid ). >Al• Waf å’implicitly identifies >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib as the renewer of the first century and

explicitly identifies Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil• as that of the seventh. The eighth

is the Seal of saints and is both the representative and inheritor of the Seal of

prophets. In this eight-fold line the clear choice for Seal of sainthood is

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ (b. 702/1301), and >Al• follows suit. He describes his father’s

birth year as the advent of he who would unite the Word of God—a description

of the Seal taken from his father’s own account. However, it appears that >Al•

does not in fact call his father the “Seal of saints”; instead he calls him the“Great Seal.” This might be simply a question of variant terminology, or it

might be something more. It seems that >Al• Waf å’ wants to venerate his father,

yet he proceeds to offer a calculation that points to the year in which he him-

self is writing, 799 a.h., as the beginning of the century that will see the End of

Time and the Apocalypse. Also, this is in accord with his father’s date of 800

a.h. as the year that will see the Seal of the eighth cycle. This certainly points

to >Al• Waf å’ as the final Seal of sainthood, but this reckoning presents a prob-

lem. If the seventh cycle was renewed by al-Shådhil• (d. 658 a.h.), and

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ is the Great Seal (and supposedly the Seal of sainthood),

what exactly is >Al• Waf å’s title and role? The dilemma could be resolved by

making way for a ninth cycle, but this would fly in the face of the cosmology

so carefully laid out by Mu˙ammad Waf å’, which identified eight heavens,

eight prophets, and eight great saints. The problem does not appear to have

been resolved. However, from a wider perspective we may propose one answer:




>Al• Waf å’ reserved the unsurpassed sanctity of the Seal for his father. He asso-

ciated him with the divine Word and called him the “Seal of the circle of Saint-

hood.” However, for himself he described a position that took the only nextstep possible, that is, that of an apocalyptic function. He repeatedly points to

himself in his calculations of the dawn of the End Time. Perhaps it should not

surprise us that here, in all but name, >Al• Waf å’ has finally turned to Ibn

>Arab•’s distinction between Mu˙ammadan sainthood and Universal sainthood.

Without using the terms themselves, >Al• Waf å’s dilemma, and his resolution of

it, echo Ibn >Arab•’s distinction between an elite Seal of Mu˙ammadan saint-

hood and an apocalyptic Seal of sainthood.

Allow me to conclude with a proposal for a wider perspective on the

structure of Waf å’ mysticism. First it bears repeating that our subjects were not

constructing any grand philosophical model. Their concern was to lay out their

mystical vision in whatever form was suitable. As we saw, properly philosoph-

ical concepts are not absent from their writings, yet Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’

could never be considered good students of Ibn S•nå. (The strength and creativ-

ity of mystical writing probably rest on this flexible and ambiguous relationship

with traditional philosophy.) Having noted the absence of any consistent philo-sophical “system,” however, recognition must be made of a certain structure.

Our survey of Waf å’ thought has shown three basic concerns. For both Mu˙am-

mad and >Al• Waf å’ the Akbarian ontology of a qualified Oneness of Being

(often articulated through the theory of tajall• ) is a central ground. Based on

this, a theory of the nature of spiritual direction is constructed. The third con-

cern, also grounded in that ontology, is with sanctity and in particular its Seal.

For both our writers, their concepts of spiritual guidance and sanctity could

only have taken the form they did within that ontological universe. The exag-gerated existential claims regarding the teacher draw on the language and the

principles of the qualified “Oneness of Being” ontology. The concern for the

Seal of saints can also be understood in much the same light. This concern

with the elevated spiritual guides, the teachers, the saints, and the seals of

sainthood finds its footing in that ontology. Thus, the categories of knowing

and being become intertwined; the saint is not only one who has greater insight,

from the Oneness of Being perspective (and this is underlined by the Waf å’s),

but he has an existential role to play. The multivalent nature of divine Self-

disclosure reflects a dual epistemic and ontic role. It is worth noting that fromthe competing perspective of utter oneness (associated with Ibn Sab>•n), it

would be of little use to dwell on an existential role for saints—and by implica-

tion for their apocalyptic Seal—since everything shares equally in the existen-

tial identity with the Divine. In contrast, according to the Akbarian and Waf å’

Oneness of Being, with its insistence on a qualified identification with the

Conclusion 161



Divine, being and knowing retain a hierarchical differentiation. That is, not

everything shares equally in identification with the Divine, and thus the saints

and guides have an important role to play. The Waf å’s inflated concern withsanctity and their understanding of its very nature reflect this mystical perspec-

tive on knowing and being.




Introduction

1. C. Williams, Islamic Monuments in Cairo: A Practical Guide (Cairo: AmericanUniversity in Cairo Press, 1993) 230.

2. >Abdullah Y¥suf >Al•, trans. The Holy Qur’å n (Brentwood, MA: Amana, 1989).

Qur’anic quotations will be taken from this translation. Words in parentheses are Y. >Al•’s

completions. However, in some places I will rely on my own translation.

3. For more on these figures see E. Ormsby, Theodicy in Islamic Thought

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984); M. Aminrezavi, Suhrawardi and the

School of Illumination (Surrey: Curzon, 1997).

4. There do appear, however, references to devotional practice. In two instances

we are told of Mu˙ammad’s practice of spending much of the night in supererogatoryprayer: (Q. 73:1–3) and (Q. 73:20).

5. Various accounts are provided by al-Bukhår•, amongs others, in his Ía˙•˙,

Íalåt, 1 and Manåqib, 42. See Encyclopedia of Islam second ed. s.v. “Mi’rå j” for more

details on the historical and literary development.

6. For an introduction to these see M. Sells, Early Islamic Mysticism (New York:

Paulist, 1996) 242 ff. See also P. Lory, “Le Mi> r å j d’Ab¥ Yaz•d Bis†åm•” in Le voyage ini-

tiatique en terre d’Islam: ascensions célestes et itinéraires spirituels A. Amir-Moezzi ed.

(Louvain-Paris: Peeters, 1996), and J. W. Morris, “Spiritual Ascension: Ibn >Arabi and the

Mi> r å j” (parts 1, 2) in Journal of the American Oriental Society vol. 107, no. 4, 1987.7. See Sells, Early Islamic Mysticism ch. 5; L. Massignon, Essai sur les origines

du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane (Paris: Librairie Orientaliste, 1954)

245–50; al-Sulam•, Tabaqå t al-ß¥ fiyya (Aleppo: Dår al-Kitåb al-Naf •s, 1986) 56–60. On

this figure in general, see Josef van Ess, Die Gedankenwelt des Óå ri† al-Mu˙å sib•

(Bonn: Selbstverlag des Orientalischen Seminars des Universität Bonn 1959).

8. Sells, Early Islamic Mysticism ch. 7; Massignon, Essai sur les origines 274–80;

al-Sulam•, ˇ abaqå t al-ß¥ fiyya 67–74.

Notes



9. A. Abdel Kader, The Life, Personality, and Writings of al-Junayd (London:

Luzac, 1962); Far•d al-D•n >A††år, Tadhkirat al-awliyå (Tehran: Kitabkhanah-i Markazi

1977) 416–51. The fifth/eleventh century writer al-Hujw•r• characterizes Bas†åm•’s

approach as one of sukr (intoxication) and Junayd’s as one of ßa˙w (sobriety). Al-

Hujw•r•, The Kashf al-Ma j¥b: The Oldest Persian Treatise on Íufiism R. Nicholson

trans. (London: Luzac, 1936) 189.

10. G. Böwering, The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Qur’anic

Hermeneutics of the Sufi Sahl at-Tustari (d. 283/896) (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1980)

232. For an early account of his “school” see al-Hujw•r•, The Kashf al-Ma j¥b 195–210.

We shall return briefly to this thinker in the first chapter of this study.

11. Massignon, Essai sur les origines 205. P. Nwyia, Exegèse coranique et langage

mystique (Beirut: Dar al-Machreq, 1970) 156 ff.

12. F. Meier, “Khuråsån and the End of Classical Sufism” in his Essays on Islamic

Piety and Mysticism J. O’Kane trans. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1999) 189. For a wider outline

see Meier’s “Mystic Path” in The World of Islam: Faith, People, Culture B. Lewis ed.

(London: Thames and Hudson, 1970).

13. These terms, shaykh al-ta> l• m and shaykh al-tarbiyya, were first conied by the

Shådhilite writer Ibn >Abbåd al-Rund•. See P. Nwyia, Ibn > Abbå d de Ronda (1333–1390),

lettres de direction spirituelle (Al-Raså ’il al-ßughr å ) (Beirut: Dår al-Machriq, 1961)

106–15, 125–38.

14. F. Meier, “Khuråsån and the End of Classical Sufism” 195. J. Paul sees a shift

at this time to a model in which the saint exercises complete authority over his follow-

ers; he becomes a patron rather than simple teacher. “Au début du genre hagiographique

dans le Khorasan” in Saints orientaux D. Aigle ed. (Paris: DeBoccard, 1995) 27–34. See

in the same volume T. Zarcone’s comments on a shift to a more typically Islamic model

for saintly practice. “L’hagiographie dans le monde turc” 66–67.

15. On the various forms of asceticism, see Encyclopedia of Islam s.v. “Zuhd.”

New evidence suggests the earliest ascetic schools were established by women in Iraq

and Syria. See al-Sulami, Early Sufi Women (Dhikr al-niswa) R. Cornell ed. and trans.

(Louisville: Fons Vitae, 1999) 55–63.

16. W. Madelung, Religious Trends in Early Islamic Iran (Albany: BibliothecaPersica, 1988) 44.

17. On the Malåmatiyya, founded by Ab¥ Óaf ß al-Óaddåd (d. 265/878) and

Óamd¥n al-Qaßßår (d. 270/883), see A. >Af •f •, Al-Malå matiyya wa al-Í¥ fiyya wa al-

Futuwwa (Cairo: al-Óalab•,1945); J. Chabbi, “Remarques sur le développement his-

torique des mouvements ascétiques et mystiques au Khurasan” in Studia Islamica 46,

1977. 53–60.

18. See A. T. Karramustafa, God’s Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic

Later Middle Period, 1200–1550 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994).

19. S. Sviri, “Óak •m al-Tirmidh• and the Malåmat• Movement in Early Íufism” inClassical Persian Íufism L. Lewisohn ed. (London: Khauiqahi Nimatullahi Publications

1993) 611.

20. H. Corbin, Histoire de la philosophie islamique (Paris: Gallimard, 1986) 238–47.

21. Ibn Sina, Al-Ishå r å t wa al-tanbihå t (4 vols.) S. Dunya ed. Cairo: Dår al-Ma>årif,

n.d. 4:136-–64. M. Fakhry, A History of Islamic Philosophy (New York: Columbia Uni-

versity Press, 1983) 144, 155.

164 Notes to Introduction



22. The best general study of this subject is still J. S. Trimingham’s The Sufi

Orders in Islam (Oxford: Clarendon, 1971).23. The second/eighth-century Qur’anic exegete al-Muqåtil identifies ten distinct

meanings derived from the root WLY . See P. Nwyia, Exejèse coranique 114. For a dis-cussion of the grammatical forms of the term see G. Elmore, Islamic Sainthood in the

Fullness of Time: Ibn > Arab• ’s Book of the Fabulous Gryphon (Leiden: Brill, 1998)111–22.

24. M. Chodkiewicz, “La sainteté et les saints en islam” in Le culte des saints

dans le monde musulman H. Chambert-Loir and Cl. Gillot eds. (Paris: École Françaisd’Extrème Orient, 1995) 15.

25. See H. Landolt, “Walåyah” in Encyclopedia of Religion M. Eliade ed. (NewYork: Macmillan, 1987) 319; K. M. al-Shaibi, Sufism and Shi’ism (Surrey: Laam, 1991)ch. 3; M. A. Amir-Moezzi, The Divine Guide in Early Shi’ism D. Streight trans.(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994) 91–97; and H. Corbin, Histoire de

la philosophie islamique 455–58.26. In recent years in the field of comparative religion advances have been made

in the area of saints and sainthood. My approach is rather different, but brief mentionshould be made of at least two prominent analyses. Richard Kieckhefer sees the saint asa figure who signals the tension between religious imitability and otherness and suggeststhat comparisons between sainthood in various religious traditions can focus on the waythis tension is dealt with in its various historical and cultural contexts. Kieckhefer, R.

and George Bond, eds., Sainthood: Its Manifestations in World Religions (Berkeley:University of California Press, 1988) 243–46. A more sophisticated model is proposedby K. Young, who presents a four-fold model based on a dialectic between chaos andorder. As heroes, prophets, or founders of a religion, holy figures may assert order in theface of chaos. More specifically saintly figures may then function as preservers of thatorder through their exemplary practice. Once order has become routine it may then bechallenged by the inspired and often unpredictable saint, one type of which is foundwithin an existing religious institution and one from without. Sharma, A., ed. Women

Saints in World Religions (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000) 28–29.

1. Tirmidh•, Ibn >Arab•, and Others on Sanctity

1. For his biography see the introduction of al-Óak•m al-Tirmidh•, The Concept

of Sainthood in Early Islamic Mysticism B. Radtke and J. O’Kane trans. (Surrey:Curzon, 1996) 2. On al-Tirmidh•’s birth and death dates see B. Radtke, “The Concept of Wilåya in Early Sufism” in Classical Persian Sufism 483–83.

2. Ibn Ab• al-Dunyå, Kit å b al-awliyå ’ in Majm¥> at Raså ’il (Cairo: 1935); Ab¥

Sa>•d al-Kharråz, Kit å b al-kashf wa al-bayå n (Baghdad: 1967); and P. Nwyia, Exegèsecoranique 238 ff.

3. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 39. An extensive collection of sayings onthe subject, from the classical and medieval periods, is chapter 38 of R. Gramlich, Das

Sendschreiben al-Qushayis über das Sufitum (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1989).4. Al-Hujw•r• (d. 464/1071), The Kashf al-Ma j¥b 212: “Certain Shaykhs formerly

composed books on this subject [sainthood], but they became rare and soon disappeared.”

Notes to Chapter 1 165



5. Radtke, in The Concept of Sainthood 10, establishes S • rat al-awliyå ’ as

Tirmidh•’s original title for the book. I have decided to keep the “suprious later title”

Khatm al-walå ya since that is how the work is known to all later writers. (It seems to

me ill advised to try to insist upon an alternative title to such a well-known work.) See

also H. Landolt’s review of Radtke’s Arabic edition of the work, Drei Schriften des

Theosophen von Tirmidh, in The Journal of the American Oriental Society no. 114,

1994.

6. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 2–5.

7. S. Sviri, “Óak •m al-Tirmidh• and the Malåmat• Movement in Early Sufism” 606.

See also al-Sulam• (d. 412/1021), Riså lat al-malå matiyya, translated by R. Deladrière as

Sulam• : La lucidité implacable (Paris: Arléa, 1991). This Malåmat• movement should be

distinguished from the term malå m• as it is later used by Ibn >Arab•.

8. More precisely, Tirmidh• criticizes behavior usually attributed to the

Malåmatiyya. S. Sviri, “Óak •m al-Tirmidh• and the Malåmat• Movement in Early

Sufism” 611. See his letter to Mu˙ammad Ibn al-Fa∂l al-Balkh•, translated in B. Radtke,

Al- Ó ak • m al-Tirmdh• . Ein islamischer Theosoph des 3./9. Jahrhunderts (Freiburg: 1980)

123. See also the discussion in F. Meier’s “Khuråsån and the End of Classical Sufism”

205 ff; and Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 127, 128.

9. On their distinctive theology see W. Madelung, “Sufism and the Karråmiyya”

in Religious Trends in Early Islamic Iran 40–43.

10. Those who receive God’s ˙ad • th are mu˙addath¥n. See hadith refereces in

Friedmann “The Finality of Prophethood in Sunn• Islåm” in Jerusalem Studies in Arabic

and Islam no. 7, 1987. 203. When not referring to the Traditions, I have kept the term in

italics.

11. The phrase “the spirit causes [a prophet] to accept it” is the translation Radtke

gives for ’|©mf® If†‘. The passage runs: ’0|©mf® |f†0∏Mn©hƒ L jo∂ M Dπm©H §qÉr∂‘. An alternative

would be “And thanks to [the spirit] the [end of revelation] is accepted.” The adavan-

tage of the latter reading is that it alludes to the continuing role of the spirit after the end

of revelation.

12. ’|e∂vπ Ig©H §©M K˜ ]É∂!m©H M‘ could also be translated as “As for the one possessed

of sainthood—God administers His speech [to him].”13. Sak •na is found in the Qur’an (2:248) associated with the Ark (as in the

Hebrew Bible) but it is more generally used in accounts of God directly assisting

Mu˙ammad in times of crisis (e.g., Q. 9:26, 9:40). It is striking that Tirmidh• would use

this term in his doctrine of the inspiration of saints, when its scriptural referrent is to the

Prophet.

14. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 111; Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå O.

Ya˙yå ed. (Beirut: al-Ma†ba>a al-Kåth¥l•kiyya, n.d.) 346. Radtke’s translation is based

on his edition of Kit å b S • rat al-awliyå ’ in Drei Schriften des Theosophen von Tirmidh.

Note that there are discrepancies between this and O. Ya˙yå’s edition.15. Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå 347. See also Radtke’s translation in

Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 113.

16. Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå 353. See also Tirmidh•, The Concept of Saint-

hood 119.

17. Elsewhere, it appears Tirmidh• holds that sainthood, prophecy, and mission

(riså la) have been established latently in individuals since before creation. Without

166 Notes to Chapter 1



much elaboration, Tirmidh• mentions the covenant (> aqd ) God made of each type.

Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 119, 151.

18. This dual nature of walå ya saw its greatest elaboration in the Sh•>• doctrine of

the Imåm. See below, our section entitled “Walåya and Sh•>ism.”

19. Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå 349. See also Tirmidh•, The Concept of

Sainthood 115 .

20. Note the lowly position he is assigning to the zuhhå d , whom Tirmidh• criticizes

elsewhere.

21. Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå 357–58. See also Tirmidh•, The Concept of

Sainthood 121–22. Y. Friedmann, “Finality of Prophethood in Sunn• Islåm” in Jeru-

salem Studies in Arabic and Islam no. 7, 1986, 205, describes later discussions that

move to deprive the mu˙addath of any intrinsic spiritual authority.

22. Radtke translates the inferior designation as “the Friend of what is due unto

God.” See The Concept of Sainthood 26.

23. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 93; Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå 332.

24. He who makes this initial step, the “saint of the truth of God,” is described as

guarding over his body parts in an effort to become morally upright. Through this dis-

cipline his lower self is calmed, and his body is controlled. Tirmidh•, The Concept of

Sainthood 44.

25. H. Landolt, “Walaya” in Encyclopedia of Religion 321. See also P. Fenton’s

“The Hierarchy of the Saints in Jewish and Islamic Mysticism” in Journal of the

Muhyiddin Ibn > Arabi Society vol. 10, 1991. The concept of ‘abd å l’ appears early in the

second/eighth century. See J. van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3.

Jahrhundert Hidschra (6 vols.) (Berlin-New York: Walter deGruyer, 1991–97) 2:89, and

R. Gramlich, Die schiitischen Derwischorden Persiens (3 vols.) (Wiesbaden: Steiner,

1965–1981) 2:162. J. Baldick notes the Jewish antecedent of the idea of the badal; see

his Imaginary Muslims: the Uwaysi Sufis of Central Asia (London: Tauris, 1993) 31.

26. I. Goldziher, Muslim Studies (2 vols.) (London: Allen and Unwin, 1962) 293.

27. See Q. 2:51, 5:25, 7:142, 46:15. In the Old Testament, the number 40 usually

describes a period of time. J. Segal, “Numerals in the Old Testament” in Journal of

Semitic Studies no.10, 1965. 10. For the various uses of 40 in the hadith literature see A.J. Wensinck’s Concordance et Indices de la Tradition Musulmane (8 vols.) Leiden: Brill,

1943. 2:215–16.




31. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood , 130; Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå

367.


33. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 102; Tirmidh•, Kit å b khatm al-awliyå 337.34. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 110; Tirmidh• , Kit å b khatm al-awliyå

345.

35. Y. Friedmann, “Finality of Prophethood in Sunn• Islam” 179. In hadith the

prophet Mu˙ammad also called himself “al-> aq• b,” a term that is usually understood as

the last prophet. See ibid. 182. On the concept of a ‘Seal of prophets,’ from an impor-

tant pre-Islamic source, see G. Stroumsa, “‘Seal of the Prophets’ The Nature of a




Manichaean Metaphor” in Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 7, 1986. The Arabic

text of the New Testament in one instance mentions Jesus as having been sealed by God:

(John 6:27) ’|ljø v® Ï‡H |g©H Hcˆ # . . .‘36. G. Böwering, The Mystical Vision 235.

37. Böwering, The Mystical Vision (with changes) 234.

38. On this term see W. Chittick, The Self-disclosure of God: Principles of Ibn

> Arab• ’s Cosmology (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998) 406 fn. 8.

39. Böwering, The Mystical Vision 258.

40. On Ja>far al-Íådiq (d. 145/765) and the Muhammadan Light, see L. Massignon,

Essai sur les origines du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane (Paris: Librairie

Orientaliste, 1954) 205. For a wider study of the subject see U. Rubin, “Pre-existence

and Light; Aspects of the Concept of N¥r Mu˙ammad” in Israel Oriental Studies no. 5,

1975.

41. Böwering, The Mystical Vision 232.

42. One figure not treated in our study, yet deserving of further attention, is the

Ismå>•l• al-Mu’ayyad f • al-D•n al-Shiråz• (d. 470/1077), who proposed a “Seal of [Sh•>•]

Imåms” and a “Universal Human” the latter being represented first as prophets and then

as Imåms. Noted in H. Landolt’s review of Chodkiewicz, Le Sceau des saints in Bulletin

critique des annales islamologiques no. 4, 1987. 84.

43. Al-Hujw•r•, The Kashf al-Ma j¥b: 210.

44. Chodkiewicz notes that neither do the entries for Tirmidh• in Sulam• (d.

412/1021) ˇ abaqå t al-ß¥ fiyya or Ab¥ Nu>aym al-Ißfahån• (d. 430/1038) Ó ilyat al-

awliyå ’ make any mention of the Seal of sainthood.

45. Tafs• r Ibn > A†å ’ in Trois oeuvres inédites de mystiques musulmans P. Nwyia ed.

(Beirut: 1973) 164. For this passage see also R. Gramlich, Ab¥ al-> Abbå s ibn > A†å ’: Sufi

und Koranausleger (Stuttgart: Steiner, 1995) 298.

46. Ab¥ Bakr al-Kalåbådh•, The Doctrine of the Í¥ f • s A. J. Arberry trans.

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 61.

47. Al-Qushayr•, al-Riså la al-Qushayriyya A. Ma˙m¥d ed. (Cairo: al-Sha>b, 1989)

436.

48. On R¥zbihån see C. Ernst’s recent works, The Unveiling of Secrets: Diary of a

Sufi Master (Chapel Hill: Parvardigar, 1997), and Ruzbihan Baqli: Mysticism and the

Rhetoric of Sainthood in Perisan Sufism (Surrey: Curzon, 1996).

49. M. Takeshita, Ibn > Arab• ’s Theory of the Perfect Man and Its Place in the

History of Islamic Thought (Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of

Asia and Africa, 1987) 153.

50. M. Kister “The Interpretation of Dreams: An Unknown Manuscript of Ibn

Qu†ayba’s >Ibåråt al-ru’yå” Israel Oriental Studies no. 4, 1974. 70.

51. J. Baldick, Mystical Isalm (New York: New York University Press, 1989) 41.

Radtke, “The Concept of Wilåya” 485.52. M. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints: Prophethood and Sainthood in the

Doctrine of Ibn > Arab• L. Sherrard trans. (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993) 30.

53. Massignon, Essai sur les origines 197 ff.

54. Al-Hujw•r•, The Kashf al-Ma j¥b 212. Also, al-Kharråz was active in Baghdad

at the same time Tirmidh• lived in Transoxiana. It is thus unlikely that al-Kharråz had

read Tirmidh• and was already criticizing him.




55. N¥rudd•n Isfaråyin•, Le Révélateur des Mystères H. Landolt ed. and trans.(Paris: Verdier, 1986) 119 fn. 187 points to some of Tustar•’s ideas that might haveopened him up to such accusations.

56. See the entry on the former in the Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam; on the lattersee Massignon’s “Óul¥l” in the Encyclopedia of Islam (second ed.). See also the myste-rious Jahmiyya sect discussed in W. Watt, The Formative Period of Islamic Thought

(Rockport MA: Oneworld, 1998) 143.57. Landolt, “Walåya” in Encyclopedia of Religion 319.58. H. Corbin, Histoire de la philosophie islamique (Paris: Gallimard, 1986) 105.59. M. H. Tabå†abå’•, Shi’ite Islam trans. S. Nasr (Albany: State University of New

York Press, 1975) 179–180, and “Ghad•r Khumm” in Encyclopedia of Islam (second

ed.). >Al• is understood to have been appointed to the “general guardianship,” or walå ya-i >å mma. Shi’ite Islam 40. On the traditions of >Al• inheriting Mu˙ammad’s pre-existen-tial light, see U. Rubin, “Pre-existence and Light: Aspects of the Concept of N¥rMu˙ammad” in Israel Oriental Studies no. 5, 1975; particularly pp. 109–10.

60. H. Corbin, En Islam Iranien (4 vols.) (Paris: Gallimard, 1971) 1:274.61. See M. Momen, An Introduction to Shi> i Islam (New Haven: Yale University

Press, 1985) ch. 8.62. Nasiroddin Tusi, La convocation d’Alamut (Raw∂ at al-tasl• m) C. Jambet trans.

(Éditions UNESCO / Verdier, 1996) 295.

63. Corbin, En Islam iranien 3:179.64. Kit å b naßß al-nuß¥ß f • shar al-fuß¥s H. Corbin and O. Ya˙ia eds. (Teharan:Bibliothèque Iranienne, 1975).

65. Corbin, Histoire de la philosophie islamique 458. See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the

Saints 49, 136–37, for comments on Åmul•’s (and Corbin’s) interpretation.66. For an extensive bibliography see O. Ya˙ia, Histoire et classification de l’oeu-

vre d’Ibn > Arab• (2 vols.) (Damascus: Institut Français de Damas, 1964).67. One edition, from 1994, was printed in Beirut by Dår al-Fikr. The only critical

edition of the text, begun by Osman Ya˙ia, remains unfinished: Cairo: al-Hay’at al-

Mißriyyat al->åmma li al-Kitåb, 1972–.68. For a complete biography see C. Addas Quest for the Red Sulfur: The Life of

Ibn > Arab• P. Kingsley trans. (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993) and Ibn >Arab•’,Sufis of Andalusia (R¥˙ al-quds) R. Austin trans. (London: Allen and Unwin, 1971). Asurvey of the study of Ibn >Arab• is J. Morris’s “Ibn >Arab• and His Interpreters; Part I:Recent French Translations” Journal of the American Oriental Society vol. 106, no. 3,1986; “Ibn >Arab• and His Interpreters; Part II : Influences and Interpretations” Journal

of the American Oriental Society. vol. 106, no. 4, 1986; “Ibn >Arab• and His Interpreters;Part II (conclusion): Influences and Interpretations” Journal of the American Oriental

Society vol. 107, no. 1, 1987.69. Creative Imagination in the Í¥ fism of Ibn > Arab• R. Manheim trans. (Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1969).70. El Islam cristianizado, estudio del sufismo a través de las obras de Abenarabi

de Murcia (Madrid: 1931).71. The Mystical Philosophy of Mu y• d-D• n Ibn al-> Arab• (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1939).




72. A Comparative Study of the Key Philosophical Concepts in Taoism and Sufism

(Tokyo: Keio Univeristy, 1966); reprinted in 1983 by the University of California Press

as Sufism and Taoism.

73. Ibn al-> Arabi’s Metaphysics of Imagination: The Sufi Path of Knowledge

(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989) and The Self-Disclosure of God:

Principles of Ibn al-> Arabi’s Cosmology (Albany: State University of New York Press,

1998). These books take a thematic approach to the essential aspects of Ibn >Arab•’s

thought, presenting substantial passages in translation from the Fut ¥˙å t.

74. M. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints. Important also is his An Ocean without

Shore: Ibn > Arab• , the Book, and the Law D. Streight trans. (Albany: State University of

New York Press, 1993). Large parts of Ibn >Arab•’s Fut ¥˙å t are translated in Les

Illuminations de la Mecque (Paris: Sinbad, 1988).

75. On the issue of “wa˙dat al-wuj¥d ” see the following: H. Landolt, “Simnån• on

Wa˙dat al-Wuj¥d” in Collected Papers on Islamic Philosophy and Mysticism M.

Mohaghegh ed. (Tehran: 1971) (In this concise presentation, Landolt notes the impor-

tant role in Ibn >Arab•’s thought of Self-disclosure as the mediation between the “Third

entity” or Nafas al-Ra˙mån and God as Absolute Being. He also notes that it was the

later followers of Ibn >Arab• who identified wuj¥d with the Nafas al-Ra˙mån. See pages

100–04.) W. Chittick, “Sadr al-D•n al-Qunaw• on the Oneness of Being” in International

Philosophical Quarterly no. 21, 1981; M. Chodkiewicz, Aw˙ad al-D• n Balyå n• : Epître

sur l’unicité absolue (Paris: 1982); T. Izutsu, “An Analysis of Wa˙dat al-Wuj¥d” in

Creation and the Timeless Order of Things (Ashland OR: White Cloud, 1994).

76. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 15.

77. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 103; Chodkiewicz, An Ocean without Shore

47.


79. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 74, 80. Although he does not elaborate on the

idea, Sahl Tustar• pointed to the idea of prophetic inheritance. He wrote, “There is no

prophet who does not have someone similar to himself in this community, that is to say,

a wal• who shares in his charisma.” Böwering, The Mystical Vision 65. It is also worth

noting that Ab¥ Madyan (d. 594/1198) conceived of the mystic attaining certain virtuesthanks to certain prophets, for example, love from Job, sincerity from Moses, etc. V.

Cornell, The Way of Abu Madyan (Cambrige: Islamic Texts Society, 1996) 86.


81. Chodkiewicz, An Ocean without Shore 48.

82. Chodkiewicz, An Ocean without Shore 49.



85. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 93. The Qur’an describes God lifting Idr•s up

to a “sublime place” (Q. 19:57); it also denies the death of Jesus (Q. 4:157). Al-Kha∂iris considered to have been the mysterious figure Moses met (Q. 18:65) and who had

been taught “from God’s own presence.”

86. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 93. Ibn >Arab•, al-Fut ¥˙å t al-Makkiyya

(Beirut: Dår al-Fikr, 1994) 3:9.

87. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 94. We shall return to this ˙aq• qa mu˙am-

madiyya, or Muhammadan Reality, shortly.




88. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 126.89. Ibn >Arab•, The Bezels of Wisdom R. Austin trans. (New York: Paulist, 1980)

168 (with changes); Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam A. >Af •f • ed. (Beirut: n.d.) 134. It is inter-esting to note that this continuing sanctity includes, according to Ibn >Arab• elsewhere,the saints of the non-Muslim communities. See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 78, 79.

90. Ibn >Arab•, The Bezels of Wisdom 169; Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 135. Thispassage in particular was attacked by Ibn Taymiyya. See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints

51.91. In a recent study of Ibn >Arab•’s concept of walå ya, Gerald Elmore sees a “log-

ical absurdity” in the teaching that nubuwwa and riså la are cumulative and encompassedby walå ya, and the claim that walå ya is superior to nubuwwa only when both are foundin one person. He rightly points out that it is a mistake to compare walå ya (as a genus)to the species or subspecies of nubuwwa and riså la. See his Islamic Sainthood in the

Fullness of Time: Ibn > Arab• ’s Book of the Fabulous Gryphon (Leiden: Brill, 1998) 160fn. 165. However, Elmore’s critiques of the logic of Ibn >Arab•’s doctrine seem mis-placed in light of Ibn >Arab•’s general style of writing and thinking. In other words, wewill not learn much about Ibn >Arab•’s doctrine if we subject it to a theological critique.Elmore is insisting on a logical rigor that the concepts and language of walå ya cannotsupport. This analysis leaves him utterly disappointed with Ibn >Arab•’s concept of walå ya: “Thus, even as the very name, walå ya, is almost meaningless in its equivocalrelativity, so the nature of “sainthood” itself, if the whole truth be told, is hopelessly

multivalent” (p. 130).92. An alternative theory, proposed by >Alå al-Dawla al-Simnån• (d. 717/1317),

who himself had carefully read Ibn >Arab•, presented the walå ya of the Prophet as theorgan of reception of God’s emantion, which transforms this emanation into a generalwalå ya for the sake of the community. This prophetic walå ya also dispenses the divineemanation to the saints. See Isfaråyin•, Le Révélateur des Mystères 120 fn. 188. It shouldalso be noted that walå ya as a continuing form of esoteric prophecy is a central conceptin Twelver Sh•>ism. See H. Corbin, En Islam Iranien 1:248.


94. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 129, 133–35. Addas, Quest for the Red Sulfur 200.

95. Chodkiewicz argues against this >Alid reference. See his Seal of the Saints 68fn. 29, where he notes that the more reliable ms, an autograph, of the Futu˙å t does notmake this reference to >Al•. See also H. Landolt’s comments on this matter in his “La‘Double Échelle’ d’Ibn >Arab• chez Simnån•” in Le Voyage initiatique en terre d’Islam:

Ascensions célestes et itinéraires spirituelsA. Amir-Moezzi ed. (Louvain, Paris: Peeters,1996) 262. We shall see, in our sixth chapter below, that the figure of >Al• was to playan important role in the Waf å’s elaboration of walå ya.

96. Ibn >Arab•, The Bezels of Wisdom 66–67; Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 63. Theoriginal hadith is from Bukhår•’s Sa˙•˙ (Manåqib: 18).

97. Ibn >Arab•, The Bezels of Wisdom 66; Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 62.98. Ibn >Arab• goes on to state that as the essential reality of the Seal of prophets

has always existed, “In the same way the Seal of Saints was a saint ‘when Adam wasbetween the water and the clay.’” The Bezels of Wisdom 67.

99. Ibn >Arab•, The Bezels of Wisdom 67; Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 63.




100. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 125. (Page 107 notes specifically that one of

the afr å d is >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib.)

101. The critic Ibn Taymiyya attcked the identification of the Óaq•qa Mu˙am-

madiyya with the qalam or the > aql awwal. See M. Chodkiewicz, “Le procès posthume

d’Ibn >Arab•” in Islamic Mysticism Contested F. de Jong ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1999) 101.

102. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 69. See also Chodkiewicz, “The Banner of

Praise” in Foundations of the Spiritual Life according to Ibn > Arabi: Praise S. Hirtenstein

ed. (Oxford: Muhyiddin Ibn >Arabi Society, 1997) 55, where al-J•l• (d. 811/1408) takes

the idea further, writing, “Know that the Muhammadan Reality is a name of the Divine

Ipseity.”

2. The Early Shådhiliyya and Sanctity

1. See A. MacKeen, “The Rise of Al-Shådhil•,” in Journal of the AmericanOriental Society vol. 91, 1971, 483 for a discussion of possible birthdates.

2. For the earliest record see Ibn al-Íabbågh, Durrat al-asr å r wa tu fat al-abr å r (Q¥ß: before 1980), ch. 1. This edition appears to be incomplete when compared to the

Tunis edition of 1885 (Tunis: Al-Ma†ba>a al-Tunisiyya al-Rasmiyya). An English trans-

lation of this work is The Mystical Teachings of al-Shadhili E. Douglas trans. (Albany:

State University of New York Press, 1993). One important teacher in Tunis was Ab¥

Sa>•d al-Bå j• (d. 629/1231), who had been a student of Ab¥ Madyan.

3. Qu† b is the “pole” or central figure amongst mystics or in a hierarchy of

saints.

4. See Sålim >Ammår, Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• (Cairo: Dår al-Ta’l•f, 1952)

77–80, for good notices on these two figures, including references to primary sources.

For a detailed study of Ibn Mash•sh see Zakia Aouanat, Ibn Mash• sh, maître d’al-Shå dhil• (Casablanca: Najah El Jadida, 1998). We also have a brief independent con-

temporary source, which notes a young Shådhil• having visited Cairo on his way to

Mecca. See La Riså la de Íaf • al-D• n Ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r Ibn Z å fir: Biographies des

maîtres spirituels connus par un cheikh égyptien du VII/XIII siècle D. Gril ed. and trans.(Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1986) 177, and Arabic text, 78.

5. For more on this figure see the introduction to V. Cornell, The Way of Ab¥ Madyan (Cambridge: Isalmic Texts Society, 1996).

6. Ibn al-Íabbågh, The Mystical Teachings of al-Shadhili 20–21.

7. A. MacKeen, “The Rise of Al-Shådhil•” 484.

8. In Egypt the order attracted many well-known figures, including Yåq¥t al-

>Arsh• (d. 707/1307) and Mu˙ammad al-Óanaf • (d. 847/1443). On al->Arsh• see Sha>rån•,

al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å (2 vols.) (Beirut: Dår al-J•l 1988) 2:20. For al-Óanaf •, see E.

Geoffroy, Le Soufisme en Égypte et en Syrie (Damascus: Institut français de Damas,1995) 210. The urban landscape of Alexandria is marked by the early Shådhiliyya, most

notably by mosques of Ibn >A†å Allåh al-Iskandar• and Yåq¥t al->Arsh•, and the

tomb/mosque of al-Murs•. >Abd al->Az•z Sålim, T å r • kh al-Iskandariyya wa ˙a∂å ratuhå f • al-> aßr al-islå m• (Alexandria: Mu’asasa Shabåb al-Jåmi>a, 1982) 486 ff. Beyond

hagiographical manuscripts, detailed sources for the early history of the Shådhiliyya in

Tunis have to date eluded me.




9. On this figure see S. Botros, Ab¥ al-> Abbå s al-Murs• : A Study of Some Aspects

of His Mystical Thought (McGill University, M.A. thesis, 1976), and L. Massignon, La

Passion du Ó usayn Ibn Manß¥r Ó allå j (4 vols.) (Paris: Gallimard, 1975) 2:320–22.

10. In his translation of La†å ’if al-minan, entitled La sagesse des maîtres soufis

(Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1988) 82, Eric Geoffroy reads the title of Ibn N¥˙’s work in

which he mentions al-Shådhil•, as al-Wa˙• d ; while the edition of >Abd al-Óal•m

Ma˙m¥d (Cairo: 1986), reads al-Waß• d (p. 87). At present I have not been able to locate

either title.

11. Ibn >A†å’ Allåh Iskandar•, La†å ’if al-minan 87 and La sagesse des maîtres

soufis 82. The last reference would be to the short entry on al-Shådhil• in Íaf • al-D•n’s

Riså la.

12. Riså lat al-Shaykh Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• (Cairo: Dår al-Kutub, Taßawwuf

Taym¥r 180; film# 3750) (33 fols). In Denis Gril’s “Sources manuscrites de l’histoire du

soufisme à Dår al-Kutub—un premier bilan” Bulletin Critique des Annales Islamologiques

1994, he notes: “Copy and samå> of 943/1536, read before the Shaykh Jamål al-D•n

Mu˙ammad Ibn >Abd Allåh al-Tilimsån• al-Maghrib•.” My photocopy of this manuscript

is poor, and the samå> cannot be read. Another manuscript source which is has not yet

been explored is Ab¥ al-Íalå˙ >Al• Mu˙sin al-Shådhil•, Ta’z• r al-anf å s bi manå qib Ab•

al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• (Cairo: Dår al-Kutub, Tår•kh 388).

13. (Tunis: al-Ma†åbi> al-Muwa˙˙ada, 1986) 61–137.

14. (Cairo: 1998). I have not been able to consult his Us¥l al-tar • qat al-Shå dhiliyya

(Dår al-kutub; ms. Majåm• no. 490). For more on A˙mad Zarr¥q see A. Khushaim,

Zarr ¥q the Í¥ f • (Tripoli: 1976). On the influence of Ibn >Arab• in the works of Zarr¥q

see M. Chodkiewicz, “The Diffusion of Ibn >Arab•’s Doctrine” in Journal of the Mu yid-

din Ibn > Arab• Society vol. 9, 1991, 39.

15. (Cairo, 1974), edited by A. al-Óasan•. This work is a survey of teachings on

various sufi matters. It draws on the early Shådhiliyya and on Íadr al-D•n al-Q¥naw• (d.

672/1273), the greatest exponent of Ibn >Arab•’s teachings in Egypt.

16. Al-Yåf •>•, Mir’å t al-janå n (Beirut: 1970) 138 ff.

17. J.-C. Garcin, in his “Histoire, opposition politiqe et piétisme traditionaliste

dans le ‘Óusn al-mu˙adara’ de Íuy¥†•” in Annales Islamologiques vol. 7, 1987, 83, putsIbn >Ayyåd’s death around 1760.

18. Compilation literature continues to be produced. Some examples are

Mu˙ammad A˙mad Darn•qa, al-Tar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya wa a> lå muhå (Beirut: 1990), al-

Akhm•m•, al-Qå m¥s al-jad • d f • al-qaßå ’id wa al-anå sh• d li al-så da al-Shå dhiliyya

(Cairo: 1392/1972), and Óasan K¥h•n al-Fås•, Kit å b † abaqå t al-Shå dhiliyya al-kubr å

(Cairo: Maktaba al-Qåhira 1347/1928) (a.k.a. J å mi> al-kar å må t al-> aliyya f • † abaqå t al-

så dat al-Shå dhiliyya). I have not consulted the last two titles, nor have I seen the fol-

lowing study by Får¥q A˙mad Muß†afa: al-Binå ’al-ijtimå>• li al-† ar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya fi

Mißr: Dir å sa fi al-anthr ¥b¥l¥ jiyya al-ijtimå> iyya (al-Iskandariyya: al-Hai’a al-Mißriyyali al-kitåb, 1980).

19. al- Ó ikam (Cairo: Maktaba al-Jind•, 1977). Translated into English by V.

Danner as Ibn > A†å ’ Allå h: The Book of Wisdom (New York: Paulist, 1978). See also

Ó ikam Ibn > A†å ’Allå h: shar al-Shaykh Zarr ¥q (Cairo: al-Sha>b, 1985). An interesting

discovery has been made by W. Chittick, which identifies the final pages of the “Prayer

of the Day of >Arafa,” attributed to the third Sh•>• Imåm, Óusayn ibn >Al•, as a copy of




the munå jå t from the Ó ikam. Although this addition has come to be accepted as an inte-gral part of the prayer, >Allåma Majlis• (d. cir. 1110/1698) had noted that “certain of the> ulamå ’ have believed that this (last) folio was added to the text afterwards, and wascomposed by one of the Sufi shaykhs.” Chittick, “A Shadhili Presence in Sh>ite Islam”in Sophia Perennis: the Bulletin of the Imperial Iranian Academy of Philosophy vol. 1,no. 1, 1975. 98.

20. Mift å˙ al-falå˙ wa mißbå˙ al-arwå˙ (Cairo: Muß†afa al-Båb• al-Óalab•, 1961).Translated as The Key to Salvation by M. Koury Danner (Cambridge: Islamic TextsSociety, 1996). It appears that in this work Ibn >A†å’Allåh has drawn on Fawå ’i˙ al-

jamå l of Najm al-d•n al-Kubrå (d. 617/1220). For the details of this limited borrowing,see F. Meier Die Fawå ’i˙ al-jamå l wa-fawå ti˙ al-jalå l des Najm al-d • n al-Kubr å

(Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1957) 249–50. This work has recently been translated by P. Ballanfatas Les éclosions de la beauté et les parfums de la majesté (Nîmes: Éditions de l’éclat,2001). On al-Kubrå see also H. Corbin, The Man of Light in Iranian Sufism N. Pearsontrans. (Boulder: Shambala, 1978), ch. 4.

21. (Cairo: al-Ma†ba>a al-Mißriyya, 1930). Maurice Gloton has translated this workas Traité sur le nom Allå h (Paris: Deux Océans, 1981).

22. (Cairo: >Ålam al-fikr, 1998), recently translated by D. Penot as De l’abandon

de la volonté propre (Lyon: Alif, 1997).23. See A. Taftåzån•, Ibn > A†å ’Allå h al-Iskandar • wa taßawwufuhu (Cairo: 1969),

P. Nwyia, Ibn > A†å ’ Allå h et la naissance de la confrérie shå dhilite (Beirut: Dår el-

Mashreq, 1972), and V. Danner, Ibn > A†å ’ Allå h: A Sufi of Mamluk Egypt (HarvardUniversity, PhD. thesis, 1970). Fritz Meier characterizes the order under the direction of Ibn >A†åAllåh as “neo-classical,” in comparison to the practices of other Egyptian ordersof the period. See “The Cleanest about Predestination: A Bit of Ibn Taymiyya” in Essays

on Islamic Piety and Mysticism J. O’Kane trans. (Leiden: Brill, 1999) 318. BoazShoshan discusses Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•’s sermons—collected under the title T å j

al-> ar ¥s—in his Popular Culture in Medieval Cairo (New York: Cambridge UniverisityPress, 1993) 14–16.

24. Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•, La†å ’if al-minan 127.

25. La†å ’if al-minan 103. Ïhj… §† Ld…π©H flc¬ nj©H |g©H vf¨ mƒı |g©hƒ ˇ Nhu©H » n…C h¬ mp˚ HcˆM]∂! m©H §¨VH ¬ §g¨ HNhdu¬ Gªhs¬ n…c† /hd©M!H ˝Bhk¬ hk© ˇ∑ Û|© ˝hrd† I∂!m©H §¨VH ¬ HÛ|© /hd©M!HLjø (In theTirmidh• text this question is followed by 149 others. There seems to be no connectionbetween al-Shådhil•’s list of 15 miracles and Tirmidh•’s questions, in which there is nomention of the qu† b or of any evidentiary miracles. The point here is simply that both of these masters had composed lists of questions to act as standards by which spiritual claimswere to be tested. Compare this passage with Ibn al-Íabbågh, Durrat al-asr å r 133.)

26. La†å ’if al-minan 96. Regarding the links between Ibn >Arab• and Ibn >A†å’Allåh Iskandar•, it is interesting to note that they both composed commentaries on the

mystical poem M å ladhdha al-> aysh ... by Ab¥ Madyan. The Shar qaß• da “M å ladhd-ha al-> aysh illå ßu˙ubat al-fuqar å ’ “(Cairo: al-Ma†ba>at al->Uthmåniyya, 1935) consistsof twelve pages of commentary by Ibn >A†å’Allåh Iskandar• and is followed by a five-page “takhm• s” by Ibn >Arab•. In the latter composition Ibn >Arab• adds three lines toeach two-line verse from the original poem, thus producing a five-lined verse, a takhm• s.

27. La†å ’if al-minan 171. This episode is described in the Futu˙åt (Cairo: Bulaq,1914).




Kit å b al-Badr al-mun• r > ala Ó izb al-Shå dhil• al-kab• r (Alexandria: al-Nåsiriyya, 1862).I have yet to consult the anonymous work Al-Radd > alå Ab• al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• f •

˙izbihi (entry no. 103 or 161 in Fihris al-Makh†¥†å t al-Mußawwara (Cairo: Ma>had al-Makh†¥†åt al->Arabiyya: al-Duwal al->Arabiyya) (amåna 1302). On the a zå b in theShådhiliyya see R. McGregor, “A Sufi Legacy in Tunis: Prayer and the Shadhiliyya” in International Journal of Middle East Studies May, 1997. More generally, see C.Padwick, Muslim Devotions: A Study of Prayer-Manuals in Common Use (Oxford: One-world, 1996).

51. M. Chodkiewicz, “La sainteté et les saints en islam” 20. Of course Tirmidh•

was not the only early mystical thinker to put forward the idea of prophetic inheritance.Junayd (d. 297/909) is quoted as saying, “God’s privileged friend (saint) . . . will bemade inheritor of the marvelous gifts of the prophets.” Ab¥ al-Nu>aym al-Ißfahån•,

Ó ilyat al-awliyå ’ (10 vols.) (Beirut: Dår al-Fikr, 1996) 10:265. See also Enseignement

spirituel R. Deladrière trans. (Paris: Sinbad, 1983) 44.52. A disciple of Tirmidh•’s, Ab¥ >Al• al-Juzjån•, notes that a wal• is “in oblivion

( fanå ) of himself, but subsisting (baqå ’) in contemplation.” See H. Landolt, “Walåya” 321.53. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 26a54. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 41b55. al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya 84. In the previous chapter we noted this idea in both Ibn

>Arab• and Tirmidh•.56. Durrat al-asr å r 220. The last sentence recalls Q. 10:62.

57. La†å ’if al-minan 259. On the “gates of truth” see Q. 17:80. For Ibn >Arab•, theterm barzakh—among other meanings—may refer to the perfect human’s positionbetween God and creation. See Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 249.

58. See The Sufi Path of Knowledge 66, 76, 131, 294.59. For a substantial discussion of this return see Landolt’s “La “Double Échelle”

d’Ibn >Arab• chez Simnån•”.60. The Reality, al-˙aqq, in mystical writing is often a reference to God.61. La†å ’if al-minan 56.62. Seal of the Saints 171.

63. Tirmidh•, The Concept of Sainthood 93, 172. See also G. Gobillot, La penséed’al- Ó ak • m al-Tirmidh• (Ab¥ > Abd Allå h Mu˙ammad > ibn > Al• , m. 318/930). Ou: de la

“Profondeur des choses” (Doctoral thesis: Lyon, Université Jean Moulin, 1989) ch. 4.Ibn al-Íabbågh, Durrat al-asr å r 132, notes that a “philosopher” once said that gnosiscomes in two ways: by the path of generosity ( j¥d ) and by the path of struggle (badhl

al-majh¥d ).64. Durrat al-asr å r 131; The Mystical Teachings of al-Shadhili 118.65. Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:13.66. Durrat al-asr å r 139; The Mystical Teachings of al-Shadhili 123. It is interest-

ing to note that the Indian thinker A˙mad Sirhind• (d. 1033/1644) also used the cate-gories of “wilå yat-i ßughr å ” and “wilå yat-i kubr å.” Mujaddid• thought later added athird level, that of “wilå yat-i > ulyå.” See A. Buehler, Sufi Heirs of the Prophet: The

Indian Naqshbandiyya and the Rise of the Mediating Shaykh (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1998) 98, 122, 245.

67. Al-Shådhil• says, hkdg¨ hÉ¬ |Édg¨Mhk© hÉ¬ |g† ÏbÉÉüH HcˆınÉÉ® É¬ See Ibn >Abbåd al-Rund•, Al-Raså ’il al-ßughr å P. Nwyia ed. (Beirut: Dår al-Machreq, 1974) 123. It appars that




Najm al-D•n al-Råz• (d. 654/1256) shared this view of the possibility of acquiring the

lower form of walå ya. In his introduction to N¥r al-D•n Isfaråyin•’s Le Révélateur des

mystères (K å shif al-asr å r) H. Landolt writes, “Selon Najm-Råz•, c’est par l’initiation au

dhikr (talq• n) que le germe de la walå ya du shaykh est ‘transplanté’ dans le coeur du

novice pour y porter fruit” (p. 53).

68. La†å ’if al-minan 27.

69. M. Chodkiewicz, “La sainteté et les saints en islam” 18.

70. This definition appears to be based on al-Qushayr•’s definition given in chap-

ter 1.

71. La†å ’if al-minan 52. It seems this model of a dual walå ya was taken up by

Då’¥d Qayßar• (d. 751/1350) in the next generation of mystical thinkers. See A.

Matsumoto “Unity of Ontology and Epistemology in Qayßar•’s Philosophy” in Con-

sciousness and Reality: Studies in Memory of Toshihiko Izutsu J. Åshtiyån• et al. eds.

(Leiden: Brill, 2000) 383.

72. La†å ’if al-minan 56. Regarding the term ßidd • q, it should be noted that in

Jewish mysticism the parallel term zaddiq carried much the same meaning as it does in

our example here. D. Matt trans. Zohar: the Book of Enlightenment (New York: Paulist,

1983) 128, 129. See also G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York:

Schocken, 1954) 344.

73. La†å ’if al-minan 57. Compare Junayd’s two kinds of gnosis (ma> rifa): one

inspired directly by God and reserved for the elect, and one achieved by consideration

of the signs of His power, available to the common believer. Al-Kalåbådh•, al-Ta> arruf

li-madhhab ahl al-taßawwuf A. Ma˙m¥d ed. (Cairo: 1960) 64. It is worth noting that

elaboration on the levels of walå ya continued into the nineteenth century. Ibn >Ajiba (d.

1224/1809) identifies three levels of walå ya: (1) General, which is attained through faith

and piety; (2) Elite, which is reached by those with knowledge “by” God; (3) Elect of

the Elite, which belongs to those of gnosis and direct vision of God. See J. Michon, Le

soufi maroccain A˙mad Ibn > Ajiba (1746–1809) et son Mi> r å j (Paris: Vrin, 1973) 204.

74. It must be noted, however, that Ibn >Arab• at least once offers an interiorized

interpretation of the seal of saints. See G. Elmore, Islamic Sainthood in the Fullness of

Time, 291.75. The early Shådhiliyya’s didactic approach to mystical concepts may also be

seen in its treatment of the term substitute (badal). We saw in the previous chapter that

the badal, in Ibn >Arab•’s cosmology, is a saintly figure in the invisible hierarchy. This

is also the case for al-Shådhil•, although he puts their number at forty. La†å ’if al-minan

89. For al-Shådhil•, however, this term is also relevant to the common believer. He tells

his followers that the first level of badaliyya consists of the substituting of bad acts for

good. La†å ’if al-minan 122. He also says that anyone who has recited a dhikr from al-

Kha∂ir will be recorded as one of the abd å l. La†å ’if al-minan 121.

76. An interesting alternative model is developed by Majd al-D•n al-Baghdåd• (d.616/1219) and Najm al-D•n al-Råz• (d. 654/1256). They speak of the spiritual connec-

tion between the walå ya of the shaykh and the walå ya of his disciple. See Le Révélateur

des mystères 51.

77. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 13b.

78. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 59a.

79. al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya 89.




80. See M. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints chs. 2, 5, and chapter 1 in this volume.

81. See La†å ’if al-minan 127, 97.

82. Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam A. >Af •f • ed. (Beirut: n.d.) 135–36. See also chap-

ter 1 above.

83. The Concept of Sainthood 113.

84. La†å ’if al-minan 79–80.

85. The Mystical Teachings of al-Shadhili 186; Durrat al-asr å r 200.


87. Durrat al-asr å r 214. The Mystical Teachings of al-Shadhili 187. The

Kubraw• thinker, >Alå al-Dawla Simnån• (d. 737/1336), describes a general wilå ya of the

Prophet, which is intended for the community, and a prophetic walå ya, which reaches

the hearts of the saints. See Le Révélateur des mystères 119–20.

88. Durrat al-asr å r 215.


90. La†å ’if al-minan 39. In his T å j al-> ar ¥s 22, Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar• says,

“The saints are many. Neither their number nor their aid [to humanity] decreases. If their

number were to be reduced by one, then the light of prophecy would be reduced.”

91. La†å ’if al-minan 25-26. (The 1986 printing has omitted the word manifesta-

tions (maΩå hir ), which is on page 40 of the 1974 printing of the same edition.) We are

not told what exactly these lights of prophethood are. The permanence of both walå ya

and nubuwwa here contrasts with Ibn >Arab•’s emphasis, noted above in chapter 1, that

walå ya is eternal, while nubuwwa is finite and specific to a time and place.

92. La†å ’if al-minan 37.

93. G. Elmore, Islamic Sainthood in the Fullness of Time 131.

94. On this thinker see Encyclopedia of Islam (second ed.) s.v. “Sa>d al-D•n al-

Óamm¥’•.”

95. Le Révélateur des mystères 177–78. On the variants of “The end of the saints

is the beginning point of the prophets,” see page 121.

96. Durrat al-asr å r 227.

97. It seems that these sincere ones are in fact “saints,” but when the former are

compared to saints, these saints should be understood as common saints distinct fromthe elite. See Durrat al-asr å r 222–28 and The Concept of Sainthood 109, 141, and La

sagesse des maîtres soufis 231.


99. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 13b.

100. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 47a. This passage may have been corrupted by its copyist;

but the point seems clear that the prophets dispense from the unseen world through their

realities, while the saints, here below, draw from that unseen world by their tenuities.

101. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 44b.

102. > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq 44b. These “greatest servants” (vdfu©H nÉƒh…H) are not discussedfurther in the text.

103. The idea that religious truth is unitary is not new. Ibn Rushd (d. 595/1198)

advanced the idea, in philosophical terms, in his Faßl al-maqå l. See Arnaldez’s “Ibn

Rushd” in Encyclopedia of Islam (second ed.) 912, 913.

104. al-La†• fa al-mar ∂ iyya 44. Distinctions between the degrees of > ißma are

numerous. The Sh•>• source Bi˙å r al-anwå r argues that the Prophet’s breast was cut open




al-Kutub; Tår•kh Taym¥r 2323, film 8176) (27 fols copied in 1189/1775, by A˙mad ibn

>°så al-Khal•f • al-Shåfi>•). It is interesting to note that according to Sålim >Ammår, the

“Western” branch of the early Shådhiliyya traced Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil•’s lineage back

to the Idr•sid, while the “Eastern,” or Egyptian, branch did not. See S. >Ammår, Ab¥ al-

Ó asan al-Shå dhil• 30 ff. Ibn al-Íabbågh, Durrat al-asr å r wa tu fat al-abr å r (Q¥ß) 28.

10. A. Laroui, The History of the Maghreb 109 ff, does however see traces of a

Shi>ite political sensibility.

11. al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 58 ff.

12. It is worth reminding ourselves here that there is a distinction to be made

between a “pro->Alid” sensiblity—particulary among Sunni mystics—and “crypto-

Sh•>ism.” This “crypto-Sh•>ism” has too often been identified where there is little justi-

fication. We should recognize the gray boundary between esoteric Sh•>ism and Sunni

sufism rather than insist upon the conspiracy of a “crypto-Sh•>ism.” The Ahl al-Bayt

(family of the Prophet) have always been revered by Sunni Muslims. In the Maghreb

Shar•fan descent is attributed a certain charisma, while Cairo, through its numerous

shrines to the Ahl al-Bayt, prides itself on its association with the Prophet’s family.

13. Murta∂å al-Zab•d•, Raf > niqå b 3b.

14. Al-Sakhåw•, Al- Îaw’ al-lå mi> (Beirut: n.p., n.d.) 2:84–85. Trimingham, The

Sufi Orders in Islam 49 fn. 6.

15. Murta∂å al-Zab•d•, Raf > niqå b fols. 4a–13a. For hagiographical accounts of Tå jal->Årif •n see Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå† al-kubr å 2:134, and the two manuscripts noted in

entries no. 23 and 24 in Gril’s “Sources manuscrites.”

16. M. H. Burgoyne, Mamluk Jerusalem: An Architechtural Study (British School

of Archeology in Jerusalem, 1987) 456. Burgoyne’s historical account is drawn from

Muj•r al-D•n al->Ulaym•, al-Uns al-jal• l bi-ta’r • kh al-Quds (Cairo: n.p. 1866).

17. Burgoyne, Mamluk Jerusalem 456, also notes the existence of a Mamluk-period

zå wiya in Jerusalem, called the “Red zå wiya,” which was associated with the Waf å’iyya

sufi order. Unfortunately, the souces provide few details on this institution.See al-

>Ulaym•, al-Uns al-jal• l 392, 526.

18. Cf. F. De Jong, Sufi Orders in Ottoman and Post-Ottoman Egypt (Istanbul: Isis

Press, 2000) 105.19. See entry no. 19 in Gril’s “Sources manuscrites,” and Trimingham, The Sufi

Orders in Islam 278. See also A. Baytar, Óilyat al-bashar f• ta<r•kh al-qarn al-thålith

>ashar (Damascus: 1961–63) (3 vols.) 1:97, 3:1553.

20. The full name is Ab¥ al-Waf å’ Ibråh•m ibn Y¥suf al-Dimashq•. F. De Jong,

“Les confréries mystiques musulmanes au Machreq arabe” in Les ordres mystiques dans

l’Islam A. Popovic and G. Veinstein eds. (Paris: EHESS, 1986) 213.

21. A˙mad ibn Fåris Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya fi manå qib al-så d å t al-

waf å ’iyya. (Dår al-Kutub; Tår•kh 1151, film 14193) (46 fols.) (GAL suppl. 2, 149) (The

author was the servant of >Ali Wafa. He is writing around 830/1426. Fol. 8a gives thisyear as the date of his visit to Ahkm•m.) This manuscript is also noted in Catalogue des

Manuscrits Arabes; deuxième partie; Manuscrits Musulmans by G. Vajda et Y. Sauvan

(Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1985) vol. 3, ms. no. 1200 and is probably identical to

Kit å b al-minhaj al-ilå hiyya f • manå qib . . . al-waf å ’iyya noted in the Catlogue of Manu-

scripts in the Koprülü Library (Istanbul: 1986) 1:382. In the latter citation the author is

given as Mu˙ammad ibn Ab• al-Waf å’.




22. Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya 15a.

23. Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å II:314.


25. Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya 21a. ’»h∂MN Îh∂MN |© ˝hr† Dg¨ Îvdß Nm∑ §g¨ |∆v“m†‘One might wonder, though, how Ab¥ al-Fat˙ could have seen his grandfather dying

when he was not to be born himself for at least fifteen years, i.e. until 790/1388. Perhaps

this story was infact related by his father, Shihåb al-D•n (d. 756/1355).

26. Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å II:314.

27. Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya 5b.


29. Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar•, La†å ’if al-minan 92.

30. al-Nabahån•, J å mi> al-kar å må t al-awliyå 2:358, and Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙

al-ilå hiyya 23b.

31. al-Nabahån•, J å mi> al-kar å må t al-awliyå 2:358, and Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙

al-ilå hiyya 7b.


’...|j∂hiƒ D† h¬H M |j∂Hvƒ D† h¬H Dk¨ cøh∂ ]¨hs©H Òhd® §©H M Hcˆ Dk¬B É¬ §©hu∆ |g© D©M G…‘Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya 46a.

’(Ïny˜H SlåM hd©M!H L jø D†) Ïny¬ hrk¨ Fπh∑ :©C §©H NhåH hl… hd©M!H L jø h…‘Ibn >Arab• is the author of > Anqå mughrib.



35. See Qur’ån sura 96:1 and A˙mad al-Wå˙id• al-N•såb¥r•, Asbå b al-nuz¥l

(Beirut: al-Maktabat al-Thiqåfiyya, n.d.) 5.

36. Ab¥ al-La†å’if, al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya 1b. ’J® m©H :©C É¬ |˚hs© Jd∆h†‘Taking the Prophet’s tongue is doubtless >Al• Waf å’s claim to having been chosen

to receive mystical inspiration directly from the Prophet and to be a vehicle for its dis-

semination. I have not seen this claim made in any other hagiographies. We shall see in

chapter 6 below that >Al• Waf å’ calls >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib the “tongue” of the Prophet.


38. Ibn Óajar al->Asqalån•, Inbå ’ al-ghumr bi-anbå ’al-> umr (3 vols.) (Cairo: 1971)2:308.

39. Ibn Óajar al->Asqalån•, Inbå ’ al-ghumr 2:308.

40. J. Katz, Dreams, Sufism, and Sainthood (Leiden: University of Leiden Press,

1996) 127.

41. al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 58. Also, >Al• is told that the a zå b and

waΩ• fa of the Waf å’iyya are superior to those of the Shådhiliyya. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-

khazå ’in al-> aliyya (Dår al-Kutub; Taßawwuf 152) 92b. Nevertheless, >Al• elsewhere dis-

tinguishes himself by his inspired interpretation of al-Shådhil•’s Ó izb al-n¥r . See al-

Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:31.42. al-Maqr•z• as quoted in al-Bakr•’s Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 43. In Kit å b al-

maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 4a, however, it is noted that >Al• visited his father’s grave every

morning and evening from 765/1363 until his own death in 804/1404. >Al• Waf å’ also

appears in the hagiography of a rival Shådhil• shaykh, Mu˙ammad al-Óanaf • (d.

847/1443). There an ecounter is described in which al-Óanaf •’s spiritual superiority is

confirmed. On the day that >Al• Waf å’ dies, al-Óanaf • hears a voice telling him that the




office of the pole (al-qu† bå niyya) has been transferred to him. A. al-Battan¥n•, al-Sirr al-ßaf • f • manå qib Sayyid • Mu˙ammad al- Ó anaf •, quoted in Geoffroy, Le soufisme enÉgypte et en Syrie 280.

43. Ab¥ al-Is>åd Y¥suf ibn Ab• al->A†å’ >Abd al-Razzåq ibn Waf å’ al-Målik • al-

Mißr• (d. 1051/1641) (son of Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammadAb¥ al-Fa∂l ibn Waf å’ (khal• fano.10) (d. 1008/1599). D• wå n Ab• al-Is>å d Ibn Waf å ’(Makh†¥†å t Då r al-Kutub al-Z å hira(al-taßawwuf) (Damascus: 1980) 1:558, entry no.775, ms. no. 4676.

44. We saw earlier that even within his lifetime, al-Shådhil•’s followers were

divided between Tunis and Egypt. Leadership and the hagiographical tradition were to

develop independently in each area.

45. I have yet to find evidence that the “Waf å’iyya” in Jerusalem, or elsewhere, is

derived from the teachings or the family of Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’. Nevertheless, we

do find Mu˙ammad and >Al• Waf å’ noted in spiritual geneologies. One example is noted

by Ma˙m¥d ibn >Af •f al-D•n (d. nineteenth c. ?) in his al-R¥∂ a al-Shå dhiliyya (n.p., 1887)

55, where he lists these two figures after Ibn Båkhilå and before one Yahia al-Qådir•. This

is part of the silsila of Al-tar • qa al-Makkiyya al-F å siyya al-Madaniyya. Ibn >Af •f al-D•nalso wrote Ma>å hid al-ta˙q• q f • radd al-munkir • n > alå ahl al-† ar • q li al-S å da al-Shå dhiliyya al-Waf å ’iyya al-F å siyya (Cairo: Ma†ba>a Mu˙ammad >Al• Subayh, 1960).

46. This list is compiled from Murta∂å al-Zab•d•, Raf > niqå b; al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya; F. De Jong, Turuq and Turuq-linked Institutions in NineteenthCentury Egypt (Leiden: Brill, 1978); al-Jabart• > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of

Egypt , Al-Shawbar• al-Shåfi>• al-Tarjamat al-Waf å ’iyya ms. (completed in 1070/1658)

in Leiden University, Or. 14.437. Although our study does not take up the Waf å’ gene-

ology in detail, it should be noted that the Murta∂å al-Zab•d• manuscript is a remarkable

document on the subject. The work not only supplies lineages and names but also notes

many ijå zå t (certifications) given out by members of the family and to whom; it notes

the names of many who received the Waf å’iyya khirqa (cloak). Perhaps the greatest

service of this manuscript is its criticism of a number of forged and confused salå sil(pedigrees) in circulation.

47. The figures from the twelfth/eighteenth century onward often have “al-Sådåt”

appended to their name. This is a reference to their descent from Imåm >Al•. SeeMu˙ammad Fat˙• Ab¥ Bakr, Dhail kit å b murshid al-zuwwå r ilå qub¥r al-abr å r (Cairo:

n.p. 1994) 42.

48. Ibn Óajar al->Asqalån•, Inbå ’ al-ghumr 2:498, al-Sakhåw•, al- Îaw’al-lå mi> li-ahl al-qarn al-t å si> 10:90, and al-Suy¥†•, Kawkab al-R¥∂å (Cairo: n.p., 2003) 111.

49. Al-Sakhåw•, al- Îaw’al-lå mi> 12:20. Also noted in >Umar Ri∂å Ku˙˙ålå, A> lå mal-niså ’ (5 vols.) (Beirut: 1977) (3rd. ed.) 1:262. Sultan Ashraf °nål ruled 1453–1461,

and built this ribå† for his wife Zaynab in 860/1465. This monument, known as ribå† zawjat Íultån ° nå l, and registered with the Egyptian Antiquities department as site 61,

still stands today.50. M. al-Shawbar• al-Shåfi>•, al-Tarjamat al-Waf å ’iyya 5b, 6b. (My copy of

this ms. is missing the first few pages; I have begun pagination on the folio beginning,

]ksπ ]r∂n≈.

51. Al-Sha>rån•, al- abqå t al-kurbå 2:67. If “sons” is taken literally, they were the

sons of either khal• fa no. 4, 5, or 6. However, the term sons in this Egyptian context may

also refer to the followers of a shaykh (alive or dead) in a general way, that is, as members




of a sufi order. Regarding Ab¥ al-Mawåhib’s relationship to the Waf å’iyya, it should benoted that he composed the Silå˙ al-Waf å ’iyya bi thaghr al-Iskandariyya a.k.a. Riså lat al-awliyå ’ (India Office, London: ms. no. 669 or ms. no. 416; 10 fols.) (Sa>•d >Abd al-Fattå˙’s edition of Kit å b al-azal, p. 211, notes the error in Kashf al-Ωun¥n attributing thistext to Ibn Fåris.) Ms. also found as Dår al-Kutub, tår•kh 1151. In this work Ab¥ al-Mawåhib identifies himself with the nisba “al-Waf å’•” (fol. 2a). In fact, the work hasnothing to do with the Waf å’iyya directly. It provides an unoriginal discussion of theimportance to the aspirant of having a spiritual guide. It also gives numerous hadith cita-tions in support of this idea but does not draw on the writings of Mu˙ammad and >Al•Waf å’ themselves. The last folios of Silå˙ al-Waf å ’iyya are simply a long quotation fromIbn Båkhilå’s > Uy¥n al-˙aqå ’iq.

52. As quoted by al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 39–40.53. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 273; > Ajå ’ib al-å thå r 4:195. For

a portrait of Ab¥ al-Anwår see Description de l’Égypte, état moderne: 1, pl. 39.54. Al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 8, 9. From my investigations at the Waf å’

zå wiya in al-Qaråfa, it appears that the Waf å’/Sådåt family is no longer involved in theWaf å’iyya order. I was told that there is no longer any dhikr ceremony at the zå wiya butthat some of the festival days are celebrated there, presumably run by the Bakr •s. Weshall discuss these festivals below.

55. Although the family’s center of activity became Cairo, there is evidence thatearly on a presence was maintained in Akhm•m. See J.-C. Garcin, Un centre musulman

de la Haute-Égypte médiévale: Q¥ß (Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale,1976, 316 fn. 4) 435.

56. al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 59.57. al-Sakhåw• notes that Zaynab, wife of °nål “. . . built goodribå†s for the widows

near the zåwiya of Ban• Wafå in the quarter of >Abd al-Båsi†.” Îaw’ al-låmi> 12:45, asquoted by K. Johnson in “Royal Pilgrims: Mamluk Accounts of the Pilgrimage toMecca” in Studia Islmica no. 91, 2000, 115.

58. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 264. (Registered as monumentno. 463) A view of Birkat al-F•l and some of its dwellings is preserved in Description

de l’Égypte, état moderne: 2, pl. E.59. A˙mad Shaf •q, Mudhakkir å t • f • nisf qarn (Cairo: 1934) 1:79. For an architech-

tural account of the remains of this house see B. Maury et al., “Manzil al-Sadat” inPalais et maisons du Caire (XVIe-XVIIIe siècles) (Paris: Éditions du centre national dela recherche scientifique, 1983) 259–67.

60. >Al• Båshå Mubårak, al-Khi†a† al-tawf•qiyya (14 vols) (Cairo: 1986). 5:315.61. These graves are clearly marked. The most detailed descriptions are to be

found in Mu˙ammad Fat˙• Ab¥ Bakr, Dhail kit å b murshid al-zuwwå r ilå qub¥r al-abr å r 66 ff; al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 65. This monument is registered as Masjid

al-Sådåt, no. 608.62. In the midfourteenth/eighth century, the traveler Ibn Battuta tells us that elab-

orate building in the cemetary was commonplace. “At Cairo too is the great cemetary of al-Qaråfa, which is a place of peculiar sanctity, and contains the graves of innumerablescholars and pious believers. In the Qaråfa the people build beautiful pavilions sur-rounded by walls, so that they look like houses. They also build chambers and hire




Koran-readers, who recite night and day in agreeable voices. Some of them build reli-

gious houses and madrasas beside the mausoleums and on Thursday nights they go out

to spend the night there with their children and women-folk, and make a circuit of the

famous tombs.” Ibn Battuta, Travels in Asia and Africa 1325–1354 H. A. R. Gibb trans.

(London: Routledge, 1929) 51. For a study of some manuals used by visitors to these

tombs see C. Taylor, In the Vicinity of the Righteous (Leiden: Brill, 1998).

63. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 261. This complex, which

includes a “Tekke,” has yet to be studied.

64. For a detailed description of the interior of the zå wiya, see Su>åd Måhir,

Maså jid Mißr wa awliyå ’u ha al-ßalih¥n (Cairo: Wizårat al-Awqåf, 1980) 69–86. Su>åd

Måhir depends heavily on >Al• Mubårak, al-Khi† a† al-tawfiqiyya (Cairo: al-Hay’a al-

>åmma, 1986) 310 ff. Mubårak, p. 319, also provides the waqf endowment for the

zå wiya-mosque.

65. Al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 67.

66. L. Massignon, “La cité des morts au Caire” Bulletin de l’Institut Français

d’Archéologie Orientale, no 57, 1958, 48.

67. Tirmidh•, Sunan 39.

68. J. Katz, Dreams, Sufism, and Sainthood 127. Of interest also is that the jurist

and sometime mystic >Abd al-Ra˙mån ibn >Umar al->Ar•sh• (d. 1193/1779) composed a

work entitled Sirr al-kunå bi-ism al-Sayyid Ab• al-Anwå r ibn Waf å . It is not clear this

work, noted in > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 85, has survived.

69. The modern chronicler A˙mad Shaf •q mentions having attended the takniyya on

27 of Rama∂ån. He describes the ceremony, directed by Shaykh >Abd al-Khåliq (no. 22).

Apparently, anyone who wished to receive a name could present himself. Both his usual

and his new names were entered into a written record, after the shaykh had called them

out. A˙mad Shaf •q’s father tells him that it is commonly believed that however often one

were to return, the shaykh would always decide on the same kunya. Mudhakkir å t • f • nisf

qarn 1:79-80.

70. One source equates this m•>åd with a “mashhad,” or assembly. See al-Maqr•z•

as quoted in Ibn Taghr• Bird• al-Manhal al-Íåf• (Cairo: 1999) 8 vols., 8:164.

71. The large public celebrations of mawlid al-nab• came to be run by the Bakr•family. See De Jong, Turuq and Turuq-linked Institutions 61 ff.

72. On the vague meaning of receiving a mantle at the end of the ninth/fifteenth

century, see E. Sartain, Jalå l al-D• n Suy¥†• (New York: Cambridge University Press,

1975) 35.

73. Al-Bakr•, Bayt al-S å d å t al-Waf å ’iyya 57. This initiation practice involving the

shadd and t å j, found among certain guilds, antedates the establishment of the sufi

orders. Massignon suspects a Sh•>• origin to certain elements of the ritual. See Encyclo-

pedia of Islam (first ed.) s.v. “Shadd”.

74. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 263.75. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 272, 264. E. W. Lane, in An

Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (1833–1835) 422–28,

describes this celebration, known as “ yawm > Ash¥ra,” which ended on the tenth of

Mu˙arram. Several waqf or endowment deeds having to do with Ab¥ al-Anwår’s activi-

ties survive in the collection of the Ministry of Endowments in Cairo (Wizårat al-Awqåf).




76. See P. Gran, The Islamic Roots of Capitalism: Egypt, 1760–1840 (Cairo:

American University in Cairo Press, 1998) 38, 40, 42, 119, 234 fn. 1.

77. De Jong, Turuq and Turuq-linked Institutions 13.

78. De Jong, Turuq and Turuq-linked Institutions 39, 76 , 77. De Jong concludes

that “the most plausible explanation for the singular arrangement as it existed in the case

of al-Waf å’iyya, seems to be that it could be obtained and maintained owing to the pre-

eminent rôle in Egyptian society—in many respects equal to al-Bakr•’s—which was

played by the shaykh al-sajjå da al-Waf å ’iyya” (p. 77).

79. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 429. De Jong’s Turuq and

Turuq-linked Institutions 12, 220 notes the succession of Ab¥ al-Óåd• to the niqå ba but

has the death date wrong.

80. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 526.

81. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 269. On his varied fortunes

under the French occupation see p. 268.


83. De Jong, Turuq and Turuq-linked Institutions 121, and > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-

Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 274.


85. See Encyclopedia of Islam (second ed.) s.v. “Ibn Taymiyya.” More detailed

studies of his polemics include M. Momen, Ibn Taymiyya’s Struggle against Popular

Religion (Paris: 1976) and N. H. Olesen, Culte des saints et pèlerinages chez Ibn Taimiyya

(Paris: 1971).

86. For more on this conflict, see V. Danner, Ibn > A†å ’ Allå h: A Suf • of Mamluke

Egypt , ch. 4 “The Confrontation between Ibn >A†å’ Allåh and Ibn Taymiyya” and H.

Laoust, Essai sur les doctrines sociales et politiques de Tak • al-D• n A˙mad ibn Taimiya

(Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1939) 132 ff. Osman Yahia’s Histoire et

classification 1:133, lists a fatwa by Ibn >A†å’Allåh al-Iskandar• in defence of Ibn >Arab•.

87. Much later, in the modern era, Ibn Taymiyya would become the inspiration for

various Islamic religiopolitical movements.

88. The ninth/fifteenth century produced twice as many full-length books attack-

ing Ibn >Arab•, than were produced in the previous two centuries combined. A. Knysh, Ibn > Arab• in the Later Islamic Tradition (Albany: State University of New York Press,

1999) 201.

89. Knysh, Ibn > Arab• in the Later Islamic Tradition, writes, “Full-scale polemical

refutations of Ibn >Arab•’s teachings were produced, for the most part, by the radical and

activist ‘ulama, rather than by those who can be described as mainstream” (p. 222). This

study also concludes that in Egypt the majority who waded into these debates, although

not proponents of Akbarian thought, were opposed to the tone and virulence of the

attacks. These criticisms of Ibn >Arab• “provoked a stream of polemical responses that

were written chiefly by the ‘ulama of moderate views, not necessarily Ibn >Arab•’sadmirers” (p. 223).

90. L. Fernandes, Evolution of a Sufi Institution in Mamluk Egypt: The Khanaqa

(Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 1988) 100. On the presence of foreign sufi shaykhs in the pre-

ceding century, see La Riså la de Íaf • al-D• n ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r Ibn Z å fir 20. For a sur-

vey of khå nqå hs as monunments see >åßim Rizq, Khå nqå wå t al-ß¥ fiyya f • Mißr (2 vols.)

(Cairo: Madbouli, 1997).




91. This despite the fact that >Al• explicitly disparages the khå nqå hs as places of

spiritual limitation for sufis: (L ißmt˚ı §g¨ L irddqj©) Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå† al-kubr å 2:31.

92. As we noted earlier, the only substantial account is al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya. In

accord with its venerative aims as a hagiography, this work does not concern itself with

such mundane details as the teachers or the important books in the life of the future saint,

>Al• Waf å’.

93. This observation is also made by G. Delanoue, Moralistes et politiques Musulmans dans l’Égypte du XIXème siècle (4. vols.) (Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéolo-

gie Orientale, 1982) 3:258.

4. The Writings of the Waf å’s

1. al-Sakhåw• wrote Al-Qawl al-munb• > an tarjumat Ibn > Arab• , which set the tone

for most of the antisufi polemics of the medieval and modern times. For further discus-

sion of these polemics see M. Chodkiewicz, “Le Procès posthume d’Ibn >Arab•”.

2. al-Sakhåw•, Al- Îaw’al-lå mi> li-ahl al-qarn al-t å si> 6:21 (no. 46):

’»v©HM L Z˚ Hc… M Vhü!H §©H §qt˜H Vhë!hƒ Urk∂ » nuå‘As Nicholson points out, in the Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam Gibb and Kramers eds.

(Leiden: Brill, 1991) 189, itti˙å d is the mystical union by which the creature is made

one with the Creator, versus ˙ul¥l, which is generally the doctrine that the Creator

becomes incarnate in the creature. Both concepts thus defined are considered heretical

by most sufis but may be considered differently. “Sometimes the term itti˙å d is employed

like the Í¥fistic wa˙dat or taw˙• d , in reference to the doctrine that all things are non-

existent in themselves, but derive their existence from God and, in this respect, are one

with God. According to >Al• b. Waf å’ (quoted by Sha>rån• in al-Yawå q• t wa al-Jawå hir (2 vols) (Cairo: al-Halab•, 1959) 1:65.), the meaning of itti˙å d in the terminology of the

Í¥fis is ‘the passing away of that which is willed by the creature in that which is willed

by God.’” [This passage is found on 1:65 of the 1378/1959 edition of al-Yawå q• t .] See

also Massignon/Anawati’s “Óul¥l” in Encyclopedia of Islam (second ed.).

3. Inbå ’ al-ghumr bi-anbå ’ al-> umr 2:308. Ibn >Iyås (d. 930/1524) and Ibn al->Imåd al-Óanbal• (d. 1089/1678), along with other later compilers, repeats al->Asqalån•’s

comments. See Ibn >Iyås, Bad å ’i> al-Ωuh¥r f • waqå ’i> al-duh¥r (Cairo/Wiesbaden, 1983)

6, and Ibn al->Imåd, Shadhar å t al-dhahab f • akhbå r man dhahab (8 vols.) (Cairo:

Maktaba al-Qudsa, 1932) 7:70. >Al• Waf å’ himself seems to be answering to these accu-

sations in the following poetic line quoted by al-Suy¥†• (d. 911/1505) in his Ta’y• d al-˙aq• qa al-> aliyya wa tashy• d al-† ar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya (Cairo: n.p. 1974) 73: “They sus-

pect me (§ƒ mkz∂) of ˙ul¥l and itti˙å d . Yet my heart is empty of all but taw˙• d [profes-

sion of Divine Unity].”

4. In Ibn > Arab• in the Later Islamic Tradition 129, Knysh concludes that “IbnÓajar’s own assessment of Ibn >Arab•’s work is deliberately indecisive, betraying the

typical bewilderment of an exoteric scholar who is confronted with the Sufi legacy.” See

also Chodkiewicz’s remarks in “Le Procès posthume d’Ibn >Arab•” 122, 123.

5. Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:22–65. This entry was also the primary source

for Massignon’s dozen footnote references to various elements of the mystical thought

of >Al• Waf å’. See the index of La Passion du Ó usayn Ibn Manß¥r Ó allå j s.v. >Al• Waf å’.




Sha>rån• also quotes Al• Waf å’ in his al-Anwå r al-qudsiyya (Cairo: n.p. 1962) 95, 96,

118, 119, 120 and in his al-Ajwaba al-mar ∂ iyya > an a’ima al-fuqaha wa al-ß¥ fiyya >Abd

al-Bår• Mu˙ammad Då’¥d ed. (Cairo: Maktaba Umm al-Qar•, 2002) 536, 530, 531.

6. J.-C. Garcin, “Index des ˇabaqåt de Sha>rån•” in Annales islamologiques 6,

1963, 40–43, and M. Winter, Society and Religion in Early Ottoman Egypt: 54–58.

Sha>rån• also compiled epitomes of the work of Ibn >Arab•; al-Yawå q• t wa al-jawå hir f •

bayå n > aqå ’id al-ak å bir and al-Kibr • t al-a˙mar fi bayå n > ul¥m al-Shaykh al-Akbar (on

the margin of al-Yawå q• t ).

7. Óå jj• Khal•fa, Kashf al-Ωun¥n G. Flugel ed. (Reprinted from the 1842 ed. by

New York: Johnson Reprint 1964) 5:39.

8. E. Geoffroy, Djihå d et contemplation (Paris: Devry, 1997) 93.

9. Al-Sammån, Riså lat al-futu˙å t al-ilå hiyya f • kayfiyya sul¥k al-† ar • qa al-

Mu˙ammadiyya (Cairo: n.p. 1326/1908) 33.

10. > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt 2:242. On A˙mad al-Dard•r see

R. Chih’s “Les débuts d’une † ar • qa . . .” 148–49 in Le saint et son milieu ou comment

lire les sources hagiographiques R. Chih and D. Gril eds. (Cairo: Institut Français

d’Archéologie Orientale, 2000).

11. My thanks for this information to Humphrey Davies. The quotation is to be

found on page 264 of Davies forthcoming edition of Hazz al-qu˙¥f .

12. J. Johansen, Sufism and Islamic Reform in Egypt (New York: Clarendon, 1996)

123.

13. Al-Mawrid al-aß f å f • shar d • wå n Sayyid • Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ M. I. Sålim

(Cairo: n.p. 2000).

14. Al->Asqalån•, in his Durar al-k å mina (Hyderabad: 1929–31) 4:279 (no. 783),

describes this poetry as being in the tradition of Ibn al-Fåri∂ (d. 632/1235):

’...]∂VhÉë!H É¬ »nÉdÉ¥ M ŒNht©H ÉƒH R∂n≈ §g¨ vªhw® ∫Éa˚ı M‘ On Ibn al-Fåri∂ see the study by T. E.

Homerin, From Arab Poet to Muslim Saint: Ibn al-Farid, His Verse, and His Shrine

(Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1997). A proper comparison of Waf å’•

poetry to that of Ibn al-Fårid remains to be done. Claude Addas has recently pointed to

misattribution of the authorship of this poem in manuscript catalogs. In her “L’oeuvre

poétique d’Ibn Arab• et sa réception” Studia Islamica no. 91, 2000, 28, she suggests thetext attributed to Ibn >Arab• (listed twice in O. Yahia, Histoire et classification de l’oeu-

vre d’Ibn > Arab• , as numbers 211 and 566) is in fact by Mu˙ammad Waf å<. In personal

correspondence she has confirmed this. As we shall see, this is not the only instance

where a Waf å< text is mistakenly attributed to Ibn >Arab•.

15. This observation is made in light of the description of that style as presented in

A. Alvarez, “ Muwashsha˙ (pl. muwashsha˙å t )” in The Encyclopedia of Arabic

Literature (2 vols.) J. Meisami and P. Starken eds. (London: Routledge, 1988), where it

is noted, “It seems clear that as a non-classical form, these (muwashsha˙å t ) composi-

tions—songs, we must remember—were deemed unworthy of inclusion in tomes of lofty verse. Instead, the vast majority of these poems . . . have come down to us in books

solely devoted to muwashsha˙å t ” 2:563. It is thus likely that not all the Waf å’ poetic

works have survived.

16. This may also be read, “I am the most amazing of the amazing.”

17. Chapter 112 of the Qur’ån, verse 4 reads, “And there is nothing which is His like.”




18. D• wå n Sayyid > Al• ibn Waf å ’ (Microfilm of the Istanbul, Aya Sofia ms. no.

3922) 6b. (metre: k å mil)

/hƒny©H Ïn¥ı h˚ı |jf“∫† * h˚ı Él¨ |udl“ Vm“m©H ˝∫ß/Hnrt©H nr†ı :˚# Jdk¥ * |ƒ D∆HVh¬ J˚∫† Vm“m©H˝h®

/hlgu©H M / @iöH ÚNv¬ D† * hig… F∂h[u©H M F∂Hny©H Dg†/hrgxg©H /@ru©H F[uj† * Djƒn¥ Ô∫“ „@“!HNmßD†

The freedmen are of course the mystics.

19. D• wå n Sayyid > Al• ibn Waf å ’ 13a (metre: k å mil)

hf∆NM Vm“m©HPj† Îc©H §rg∆ * higΩ D† Dj©H L jÿH]xr˚ h˚Hhkø |© hdu©H Fd¥ Dj©H Édu©H * b… n¬ M Vm“m©H Fx® h˚ı HC≥†

20. D• wå n Sayyid > Al• ibn Waf å ’ 164b (metre: khaf • f )

D˚h¬B Gˆ# flvi©H Òh¬H M * :å nd¥ É¬ Vm“m©H Fx® h˚ıD˚hu˜H Vm“M |ƒ§ˆhk∆ v® * xdp¬ Ul“ h¬B D˚h¬B M

D˚hdƒ D† |fd¥ ns©H vˆhå * Dta… Éd¨ É¨ Ïh[üH §å@∆ ˘D˚Hn∆ ÔVNı Édy©H ]xr˚ * Dp¬H M :˚hd¨ É¨ m;©H ∏n≈h†

The > ayn—ghayn juxtaposition is a much earlier poetic motif. See for example R¥zbi-

hån Baql•’s Kit å b al-ighå na in Quatre traités inédits de R¥ zbehå n Baql• Shir å z• P.

Ballanfat ed. (Tehran: IFRI, 1998) 87, Arabic text. Ibn al-Fåri∂ also uses this motif, see

The Poem of the Way A. J. Aberry trans. (London: Emery Walker, 1952) 51, 84. G.

Scattolin will soon publish a critical edition of Ibn al-Fårid’s D• wå n with the I.F.A.O. See

also E. Homerin’s translation, > Umar Ibn al-F å ri∂ ; Sufi Verse, Saintly Life (New York:

Paulist Press, 2001) 213.

21. These observations, I believe, apply more or less to the founding and the sur-

vival of all sufi orders.

22. In the manuscript majm¥> a of the Maktaba Azhariyya (majåm•>: 1076; Zak •:41313) the “Óizb al-azal” (fol. 10a–10b) is followed by an account of the munå jå t of

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ (10b–12a). This collection of munå jå t should be considered a sepa-

rate work.

23. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, (Hadha) ˙izb al-fat , (23 pp.) (Cairo: Ma†ba>at al-Adab wa

al-Mu’ayyad, 1901). A manuscript of this ˙izb, along with WaΩ• fat al-fajr (5 fols.),

WaΩ• fat al-ßub˙ (2 fols.), and Tawj• hå t li-S • d • > Al• Waf å ’ (2 fols.) can be found attached

to al-Tarjamat al-Waf å ’iyya (Leiden University, Or. 14.437), compiled by Mu˙ammad

ibn Khal•fat al-Shawbar• al-Shåfi>• in 1070/1659. See also C. Brockelmann, Geschichte

der Arabischen Literatur (supplement) (3 vols.) (Leiden: Brill, 1937–42) 2:148, fornotice of a commentary on a prayer attributed to Mu˙ammad Waf å’. In a small book

published recently, Mu˙ammad Sålim includes Ó izb al-fath and one Íalå t al-nab• from

Mu˙ammad Waf å. Included from >Al• are Ó izb al-tawajjuhå t , a du> a, and a Íalå t al-

nab• . Of unclear authorship are WaΩ• fat al-fajr and WaΩ• fat al-sub˙. Sålim mentions a

book of a zå b, awr å d , and ßalawå t having been published in Cairo in 1949 by Ma˙m¥d




Óasam al->Ar¥s•. At some point >Al• Y¥suf also published some of the prayers of the

Waf å’iyya. See al-Naf a al-Khatamiyya, M. Sålim ed; (Cairo: al-Shirka al-muttahida li

al-†ibå>a, 1996) 57. Shaykhs Y¥suf and al->Ar¥s• were leaders of the post Waf å’ family

Waf å’iyya. (The present study has not taken up this period.)

24. See Sa>•d >Abd al-Fattå˙’s introduction to his edition of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s

Kit å b al-azal (Beirut: Dår al-Mutanabbi, 1992) 16.

25. Kawthar is a river in paradise.

26. Ibn Óajar al->Asqalån•, Inbå ’al-ghumr bi-anbå ’al-> umr 2:308. Both al->Asqalån•

and al-Sakhåw•, al- Îaw’ al-lå mi> 6:21, identify this as a work on fiqh.

27. al-Bå> ith > alå al-khalåß min s¥’ al-Ωann bi al-khawåΩ British Library Or.4275.

J. Berkey, Popular Preaching and Religious Authority in the Medieval Islamic Near East

(Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001) 105 fn. 56. Berkey (p. 32) supposes a

related work by >Abd al-Ra˙•m al->Iråq• entitled al-Bå> ith > alå al-khalåß min ˙awå dith

al-qußßåß to be lost, but it can be found in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya under Óad•th

Taym¥r 290. A modern writer, Mu˙ammad A˙mad Darn•qa, attributes Bughya al-r å ’id

(That desired by the seeker) and a Qur’ånic commentary to >Al•. See his al-ˇ abaqå t al-

Shå dhiliyya wa a> lå muhå 142. I have not seen reference to these works anywhere else.

28. J. Berkey, Popular Preaching 57, 74, 75.

29. Ibn al->Imåd, Shadharåt al-dhahab (8 vols) 8:71. (Damascus: Dar al-Mißriyya,

1979).

30. Ahmad al-Då’¥d•, ˇabaqåt al-mufassir•n (2 vols) (Cairo: Maktaba al-Wahba,

1972) 1:434.

31. For more on these important figures see Chittick’s “The School of Ibn >Arab•”

in History of Islamic Philosophy S. H. Nasr and O. Leaman eds. (London: Routledge,

1996) and “The Five Divine Presences: From al-Q¥naw• to al-Qaysar•” in The Muslim

World 72, 1982. Also useful is C. Addas’s Quest for the Red Sulfur .

32. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b al-azal 53.

’.Giï ! M L gu∆ ! Dj©H ÔHc©H ]rdrπ mˆ M ,Rgx˜H L ß!H mˆ mi©H M‘33. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b al-azal 54; and Azhar ms 105b.

§tj˚H ≈na©H §tj˚H §j¬ M .˝@rjßH @† .»Vm“m˚ !˘ /Da© Vm“M ! M .Vm“m©H M Stk©hƒ ˝@rjß!H ndy©H ]rdrπ M‘

ÔHc©H §©˘ NmiZ©H M mxf©H (‰nxj∂ ! .B) ‰nxj∆ !ı Hcˆ §gu† ndy©H ÒbgjÉs∂ :©c… hq∂ı nˆhz©H M . nd¥ @† ≈Mna˜H§g¨ ˝hr∂ ! :©C G… .]q®hkj˜H M ,]g´hlj˜H M ,]t©ho˜H M ,Vhqj˜H M ,n∂hyj˜H F∆Hn˜H Udl“ :©c… M .mi©H Dˆ M ,]rgx˜H

’.]f∆n¬ G;˚ Rdg∂ h¬ Fspƒ h;¬%H M ,Vm“m©H F∆Hn¬ §g¨ ˝hr∂ há˘ .mi©H34. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b al-azal 50.

§ku¬ M .]…nja¬ ]t∑ |˚ı U¬ Ôhtw©H ]g¨ M ,hiƒ ]tw©H Òhd® ]p∑ (sic) D† ˛naƒ ÔHc©H §g¨ Vh∂B Vm“m©H M]‘,ne;j∂ ! M §kej∂ ! |st˚ D† vπHM [|˚ı U¬ ]uƒhj˜HL ;pƒ ! Vm“m©H Rªhrπ K¬ hˆVHnr˚H §g¨ ]rdrπ G;ƒ |¬hd® ÛÚHnja%H

’.mˆ !˘ Vm“m˜ Vm“M ! M35. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b al-azal 80.

n∂mw∆ |∆Nm∑ Éddu∆] .Nmwj©H M Nmw©hƒ |∆m® D† G∑hπ /DåG… .L gu∂ L © h¬ L g¨ M ,m;∂ Ò © h¬ m… |ƒ h¬ Anu©H‘

’.|d† Éªh;©H |“mú ”m¬ M , npf©h… |© |jg∂Hb¬Gdpjsd† .(sic) mˆ |d† |ƒ Éªh;©h† [.|©hut˚H D† |∆mrƒ U®HM |gu† .»Nmw∆36. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n (Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya) ms. 23797 b;

microfilm no. 27723, and (al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya) majåm•>: 1076; Zak •: 41313. (This

majm¥> a consists of twelve titles from >Al• and Mu˙ammad Waf å’. The catalog, Fihris al-

kutub al-mawj¥da bi al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya ilå 1366/1947 (Cairo: 1948) 3:636, claims

this majm¥> a was copied in 749/1348; however, my photocopy of the first page, listing the

titles, gives no date. The date of 749 is unlikely anyway, since >Al• Waf å’was not born until




759. Two other copies of Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n have been preserved: Staatsbibliothek Zu

Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung, no. 3248, We.1674. 102 fols., and

see Fihris makh†¥†å t Då r al-Kutub al-Z å hiriyya (al-taßawwuf) (Damascus: 1980).1:224. ms. no. 1312. I am preparing a critical edition of this text. The work seems to

have been mistakenly attributed to Ibn >Arab•; see O. Yahia, Histoire et classification de

l’oeuvre d’Ibn >Arab•, number 663.

37. Q. 27:83 mentions God gathering together from each nation, on Judgment day,

those who have rejected His Signs.

38. Cf. “You (God) have caused the night to run into the day, and the day into the

night” (Q. 3:27).

39. Q. 30:60 runs, “Do not be made unsure by those who are unsure (in faith).”

’mk®m∂ ! É∂c©H :ftojs∂ ! M...‘40. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub; 1b. (al-Maktaba al-

Azhariyya; 129a)

â˜hƒ â˜H Gl;¬ M * âs©hƒ âs©H Dπh¬ |g© vlüHÉ¬b©H D† É¬b©H Gøv¬ M * Égu©H D† ns©H niz¬ ML ;ühƒ L ;üH jk¬ M * L ¬!H D† L ¬!H nåhπ M

L [¨H M hdf©H D† Ïn¨h† * ∏hfå!H D† ∏HMN!H ˝b˚L g;∆ ! M R≈h˚ J;ß hl† * ∏hq∂!H D† Òhiƒ!H ”b¬ M

[L j;ƒ ! .B] L g;∆ ! M Tojs¬ Édf∆ hl† * ∏hf∑!H D† hs¬!H ©MH ML ;ƒ!H M Ínø!H Rxk† * NHm˚!H D† NHnß!H L j… M

41. “Withness” or ma> iyya refers to God being constantly with creation. See Q.

57:4, “God is with you wherever you are.” According to Ibn >Arab•, “He is with things,

but the things are not with Him, since “withness” follows from knowledge: He knows

us, so He is with us. We do not know Him, so we are not with Him.” The Sufi Path of

Knowledge 88.

42. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub; 2b, 3a.

˝mwüH Nmuå h“n©H ... P“N!H NhdjøH&Nm©H ... B!H ‰NHm≈ vk¨ Stk©H m;ß &maÿH ... ]du˜H Ôh¬hr¬ nøH Vhë!H‘]ßHnt©H ... ‰nt©H §† UlöH Vmiå ]l;üH ... ]lπn©H Qp¬ É¬ vˆha¬ ≈hsf˚!H .˝hlöH Éduƒ nzk©H mjt©H ...

.|l;pƒ §å G… §† RüH Vmiå ]†nu˜H ... §å G… §† RüH ztπ L dzuj©H .Vhia©H É¬ Fdy©H ”HnojßH43. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 30a. and 6b, 7a. We shall

return to these terms in chapter 5, in the section dealing with Mu˙ammad Waf å’s cos-

mology.

44. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 22b, 23a, 23b.

45. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 49a.

46. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 50b.

47. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktabat al-Azhariyya 154a.

NHm˚H |d† Jgï M |fg® |f©H Fgr˚H |ƒN |d©H ˇnu∆ Él† ‰vw©H (read Òv®) Òvr©H Uq m¬ M RüH Hn¬ Fgr©H É≈hƒ‘’...|rπ

48. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 154b. We shall

see below that >Al• Waf å’ takes this idea one step further. For notice of treatments of this

hadith, and precedents to the idea, see R. Gramlich, Die Schiitischen Derwischorden

Persiens 2:27, fn. 100. Also interesting are al-Murs•’s comments on this hadith. See La

Sagesse des maîtres soufis 55.




60. Compare note 27 above, where existence is the shared/common attribute of all

beings qua beings.

61. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ al-Íuwar al-n¥r å niyya 188b, 189a.

Rgu∆ ˝mgπ Édƒnœ §g¨ mˆ M Rdrpj©H L ;pƒ Pdp∑ M |d†nz©H Gdo∆ Vhstƒ vßh† mˆ M Ta;©H F∆Hn¬ ˝MH mgüHNm∑‘˝mxƒ ˝mgu˜H Òv¨ ]rdrπ M ((?)Wdoj©H M Td;©hƒ ÛA¬hi©H §g¨ M)] ]gu©H Rgu∆ mˆ M NMvr˜hƒ Nvr©H M Ò mgu˜hƒ L gu©h… |˚!] Œnu©hƒ nˆmöH Vhëh… ! Rguj˜hƒ Rguj˜H ]≈hπH ‰Hnyjß! VhëH ‰guj©H ˝mgü ˝hr∂ M ... [hid©BH Fd¥ §† ]gu©HDtk© »vπM |dg¨ ˝hr∂ §g[j©H ˝mgπ M [|ggu¬ ! M |…MNv¬ nd¥ ]d©B!H R∂hrüH M |ggu˜H (?) ]…MNv˜H ]iöH É¬ |ƒ Ò mr∂

’.|k¨ vruk˜H ge©hƒ h˜H ]≈hπh… |rgx¬ ]≈hπH »cˆ M |du˜H L ;π U†N M |dmke©H Bh[¬62. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Mift å˙ al-s¥r min > ain al-khabar (al-Maktabat al-

Azhariyya; majåm•> 1076; Zak •: 41313; fols. 196b–206) 199a. This manuscript appears

to be a unicum.

63. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Mift å˙ al-s¥r min > ain al-khabar 201b–202b.

64. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Mift å˙ al-s¥r min > ain al-khabar 196b.

65. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b ta’ß• l al-’azmå n wa taf ß• l al-’akwå n (al-Maktaba al-

Azhariyya; majåm•> 1076; Zak •: 41313; fols. 12–71). Also in Staatsbibliothek Zu

Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung; ms. no. 3003; Pm.9. S.1–75, with-

out the author identified.

66. The Night of Power, or laylat al-qa∂ ar , is a night during the month of Ramadan

in which the fate of individuals is decided for the comming year. It is a common image

in mystical discussions of the Divine decree.

67. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b ta’ß• l al-’azmå n wa taf ß• l al-’akwå n 13b, 14a.

68. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, al-Maqå må t al-saniyya li al-så da al-ß¥ fiyya (al-Maktaba

al-Azhariyya; majåm•> 1076; Zak •: 41313] (fols. 1–9) 9b. Also in Staatsbibliothek Zu

Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung; ms. no. 3004; Pm.9. S. 85–93, as

Tarjamat al-maqå må t al-mi’a with an introduction not present in the Azhariyya ms. See

also O. Yahia, Histoire et Classification de l’oeuvre d’Ibn > Arab• , number 417.

(read vëH) vë h¬ Vm“M U¬ Éduj∂ vπHM §† L ©hu©H F∆Hn¬ VhëH |jrdrπ M ]dg;©hƒ ‰nt©H ˛Mrß M ]du˜H §t UlöH‘’.|k¨ nfo∂ ! M nfo∂ ! flc©H ˝B!H Éduƒ vƒ!H ]∂MN |j∂h¥ M ... |ƒ |d†

69. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, al-Maqå må t al-saniyya 9b.

M Ïmgr©H »vp[∂ ! §ku¬ |jrdrπ M §ˆhkj∂ ! Vv¨ §† Vvuj∆ ! ne… §† bdlj∆ ! vπM §† L srk∆ ! ]rdrπ mˆ vdπmj©H

’... nd¥ G… §t˚ |j∂h¥ M ˝mr©hƒ Nhfu©H ]¥@ƒ |g∑m∂ ! M ˝mru©H »Nmw∆ !70. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, al-Maqå må t al-saniyya 6a.

Pdpw©H ‰Mc©H Fπh∑ |ƒ F≈ho∂ Ïhxø |jrdrπ M vdiå mˆ M Uls©H §r©H Fg® G;© RüH n≈hø |drg∂ DπM mˆ Òhi©!H‘’.Ïc;©H |ge¬ §g¨ Bm[∂ ! flc©H Ò@;©hƒ L g;j∂ hs© |j∂h¥ M

71. On this term Chittick notes, “Ibn >Arab• employs it to describe the subtle

forms or relationships which tie together different levels of existence.” See The Sufi

Path of Knowledge 406 fn. 6. A raq• qa may also be understood as the initial form of

the divine Emanation. According to al-Simnån•’s cosmology, the subtle substances

(la†å ’if ), which first saw existence in the Realm of Divinity (lå h¥t ), descend to the

Realm of Jabar¥t, where they represent the Attributes of omnipotence, and are knownas the ten rare substances (raqå ’iq). These ten in turn descend to the realm of Malak ¥t

and represent the divine Acts. From this level differentiation continues with descent as

the one hundred particulars (daqå ’iq) into the Human Realm (nå s¥t ). See J. Elias, The

Throne Carrier of God: The Life and Thought of > Alå ad-Dawlah as-Simnå n• (Albany:

State University of New York Press, 1993) 72. This understanding of rare substances

(or Tenuities) and the subtle substances (or Graces) seems to be in line with what

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ is saying here, although he does not seem to have developed a full




theory of emanation using this terminology, in the way his contemporary al-Simnån•

did. A fuller comparison of these two thinkers, however, would likely produce inter-

esting results.72. Mu˙ammad Waf å’,Fuß¥l al-˙aqå ’iq—wa huwa riså la li al-Sayyid Mu˙ammad

Waf å ’ (al-Maktabat al-Azhariyya; majåm•> 1076; Zak •: 41313; fols. 216–221) 219a.

|∆Nm∑ Nm∑ É¬ vπHM G… ÔVh†h† UlöH Éduƒ L gu©H Nm∑ §† |ømtk˜H n¬!H ∏MN §† |jd©BH NHnßhƒ §g[j˜H hpfß‘’.|kd¨ ndƒv∆ |tdxg©hƒ M vπH|dg¨ Ugx∂ ! Îc©H |fd¥ §† »Vm“M Òhd® |rd®n©hf† |di©H |rd®N M |d˚hƒN |tdx©

This short work has recently been published as Kit å b fuß¥l al-˙aqå ’iq li-Sayyid •

Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ Ibrah•m Mu˙ammad Sålim ed. (Cairo: n.p. 1999). See also O. Yahia,

Histoire et classification de l’oeuvre d’Ibn > Arab• , number 148.

73. Mu˙ammad Waf å’,Kit å b al-> ur ¥sh (Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf

3715, Taßawwuf 3593, Taßawwuf ˇal>at 1562). Another copy, attributed to >Al• Waf å’ in

the computerized catalogue but not on its title page (which lists the author as

Mu˙ammad Waf å’ al-Khalwat•!), is al-> Ur ¥sh, (Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya; Taßawwuf

204; film no. 32555; 75 fols.). These are not different texts. Al-Zirikl •, Al-A> lå m: Qå m¥s

tar å jim li-ashhar al-rijå l wa al-niså ’ (Beirut: Dår al->Ilm li al-Malåy•n, 1990) (9th ed.)

5:7 and 7:37, lists the same title under both authors. See also O. Yahia, Histoire et clas-

sification de l’oeuvre d’Ibn > Arab• , number 803.

74. Ms. in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf 3593; film no. 33396; 115 fols.

See also O. Yahia, Histoire et classification de l’oeuvre d’Ibn > Arab• , number 815.

75. Kit å b al-wå rid å t (al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya; Majåm•> 1076; Zak •: 41313) 206b.

A second collection, entitled simply W å rid å t with no mention of the author, is found in

Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 3494. This

work is shorter than the Azhar piece and quotes different passages.

76. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-wå rid å t 211a.

77. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ (Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale; ms. no.

1359). There is also another copy in Dår al-Kutub.

78. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ 7a.

|k¬ ˝h[É¬ G;© M ˝hr¬ |k¬ Òhr¬ G;© M vˆha©H M Vmia˜H mˆ M vπHM G;ƒ Vm“m˜H (read vπHm©H) v“Hm©H Vm“m©H mˆ‘|¬m® hsgƒ !H ˝mßN É¬ hkgßNH h¬ M hi˚Hbd¬ M higd;ƒ !H hig¬hu∂ ! M hi˚hsgƒ !H ]f∆n¬ G… F≈ho∂ ! L d;üH M ˝h“N

’]∂#H L i© Édfd©79. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ 3b.

80. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ 104b.

81. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ 3a.

Då G… Ôv“M |g©H Ôv“M H M |g©H Ôv“M :jrdrπ Ôv“M H M :jrdrπ Ôv“M Rrp˜H (sic) ÚVhjßH Ôv“M H...‘’.Vhjß!H Hcˆ v“M D† !H VHn¬ :© Sdg†

82. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ 3b. For the sources of this hadith see W.

Graham, Divine Word and Prophetic Word in Early Islam 130.

|∆viå H M Rgø J˚h† hrgø |∆viå H fln∆ HCh¬ nz˚H M Jdå h¬ viåh† hidg¨ ÚVhjßH via∆ Dj©H Nmw©H §g¨ J˚H‘

’... Dƒ Îvf¨ ÉΩ vk¨ h˚H RüH ˝h® Rπ J˚h† hrπ83. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya (Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya;

Taßawwuf 166; film no. 34913). (I have copies of only the first eighty-three folios.)

84. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 2a.

85. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 7a.

’˝h“N ˝h[¬ G;© M ˝hr¬ Òhr¬ G;© M fln∆ HCh¬ nz˚h† |fspƒ Òhr¬ G… D† Òh;πhƒ Éduj∂ :l…hπ mˆ háH :d©H M :k¬ G;©H‘The last phrase is used on numerous occasions.




86. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 2b.

’.h;¬!H n∂ÓV D† ]dƒmƒn©H |“M mˆ v¬hp˜H M G∂hqt©H (?) vf¬ mˆ Îc©H L d;üH ∏Mn©H‘87. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 2b.

’.|˚h;¬hƒ |d©H vån˜H flVhi©H |d©M M |df˚ M |©mßN M »Vm“Mƒ RüH Ïn©H |©!H Mi† Ld;üH ∏Mn©hƒ Di©!H »Vm“M |d† niΩ É¬‘88. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 3a.

Éd¨ !H mˆ h¬ mˆ É¬ ˇnu∆H RüH :ƒN J†n¨ vr† F“Hm©H Di©!H »Vm“M Edπ É¬ ÚHvˆ Òh¬H M ÚVhjßH J†n¨ HCH‘’...:˚m… É¨ ˝hwt˚!H ]f∆n¬ D† :© Édu∆ Di©!HÚVm“M

89. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya (Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya;

Taßawwuf 152; film no. 33564; 104 fols.) 44b and 49a.

90. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 42a.

91. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 22b.

hˆVm“M D† Jjf´ |ƒ n∂vr∆ F∆Hn¬ RgÿH M |∆HVm“m¬ M |∆ht∑ Dˆ |stk© |k¬ Òh;πhƒ Éduj¬ vπHM ÔHC Vm“M ]gwtküh†‘

É¬ Hn® §g¨ Nvrƒ »hkrgø /Då G… h˚H RüH ˝h® hl… [Òvr∆ h¬ n¬!H ]rdrπ M] hiƒ ]gwtk˜H ÚNHv˜H D† Ôhrrp˜H Ômf´’.G… Ò! Ò qƒ Hn®

The meaning of the verse changes by reading one of the vowels as u rather than as a.

These vowels have been authoritatively fixed over time—with few differences in meaning

between the accepted readings—but here >Al• Waf å’ is presenting a novel reading.



Dk¬ J˚H ÎH Dk¬ J˚H |¨nt© G∑!H ˝m® Dku¬ Hcˆ M Dg“H É¬ :jrgø M :g“H É¬ /Då G… Jrgø * Vm“ M ]rdrπ H...‘’.]lzu©H M mgu©H Éduƒ ]¬ n;˜H vπm©H viå ]lg;©H »cˆ Rrπ É¬ M HVmiå :k¬ h˚H M ÎH HVm“M

Various Sh•>• hadiths report Mu˙ammad saying, “>Al•, You are from me and I am fromyou.” See A Concordance of the Be˙å r al-anwå r Al•-Reza Barazesh ed. (30 vols.)

(Tehran: Ministry of Culture, 1994) 20:14474.


95. >Al• Waf å’, Ó ikam > Al• Waf å ’ (Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya; al-Makh†¥†åt al-

Zakiyya 567; film no. 56282; 133 fols.)

96. Al• Waf å’, Al-Daraja al-> aliyya f • ma>å r • j al-anbiyå ’ (Dår al-Kutub al-

Mißriyya; B 23127; film no. 25257; 35 fols.) Copied in 1190/1776.

5. Sanctity and Mu˙ammad Waf å’

1. W. Chittick, “Íadr al-D•n al-Q¥naw• on the Oneness of Being” in Interna-

tional Philosophical Quarterly vol. 21, no. 2, 1981. This phrase was coined by a con-

temporary of Ibn >Arab•, Ibn Sab>•n, although with a somewhat different meaning; one

which admits no significant existential distinction between creation and the Creator. A.

Taftazani and O. Leaman, “Ibn Sab>•n” in History of Islamic Philosophy S. H. Nasr and

O. Leaman eds. (London: Routledge, 2001) 347.

2. From Ibn >Arab•’, Riså lat al-anwå r . M. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 149.

3. W. Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 53.4. >Alå al-Dawla al-Simnån• (d. 736/1336) proposed an alternative doctrine, cen-

tering on divine Act rather than on static existence. See Landolt, “Simnån• on Wa˙dat

al-Wuj¥d” 106–09 and his “Der Briefwechsel zwischen Kåshån• und Simnån• über

wa˙dat al-wuj¥d ” in Der Islam no. 50, 1973.

5. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, as presented in >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rab-

bå niyya 3b.




]xdp˜H Ôhtw©H ˇm∑m¬mˆEdπ K¬ |©!H mˆ M ÔHVm“m˜H Udl“ Vm“M mˆ Edπ K¬ Xdp˜H mˆ ÔHc©H Vm“m©H‘’|g©H |lßH ]dl;üH Ôhrguj©hƒ

Elsewhere these “connections” are described as a thing’s esoteric name, linking it toDivine necessary being. It serves as a link, for the people of “spiritual tasting,” to the

Eternal. See Mu˙ammad Waf å’ Kit å b al-azal 53.

6. Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 91. As an aside, we may note that this

version of “oneness” is upheld in later mystical writings associated with the Waf å’iyya.

A˙mad al-Dard•r (d. 1201/1787) in a commentary on one of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s a zå b

states clearly that anyone who “says that the world is essential with God’s essence is an

unbeliever.” Mishk å t al-asr å r (al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya, 16289; majåm•> 412; fols.

1–11) 9b.

7. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub, 43b. In the previous chap-

ter, in our discussion of al-Suwwå r al-n¥r å niyya we saw the same imagery being used

to make much the same point.


]d˚ !mdi©H ]rdrüH mˆ ÛVHvujß!H M .]f∆n˜H D† ˝mfr©H VHvujßH L ;π Fspƒ h;¬%H F∆Hn¬ D† §g[j∂ mˆ há˘ M ...‘(sic) ]d˚!mdi©hƒ Vh˜H /Di∆ Dˆ Û&Hnjø!H ]rdrπ M 0&Hvƒ%H ! Di©%H&Hnjø%H K¬ Dˆ M 0h;¬%H ÔHcƒ ]lªhr©H

’.]rƒhx˜H L ;pƒ F“Hm©H Dgï Òhd® ˝mf® mˆ *VHvujßH ]rdrπ M ... &Hvƒ%H Dˆ Nmw©H M .Nmw©H ˝mfr©9. It should be pointed out that this “prime matter” is a kind of preexistential

entity and should not be confused with manifest creation, which is the result of creation

via tajall• . See W. Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 89. This creation scheme is sim-

ilar to that of Ibn >Arab•, which also describes things coming into existence according to

their preparedness. Chittck, The Sufi Path of Knowledge 91–92. Ibn S•nå (d. 428/1037)

also uses an emanative system of creation, but for him ibd å> refers to that creation

which is not subject to form. L. Gardet, La pensée religieuse d’Avicenne (Paris: Vrin,

1951) 63. He also distinguishes between formal (ß¥r • ) and material (hay¥lå n• ) creation.

A.-M. Goichon, Lexique de la language philosophique d’Ibn S • nå (Paris: Desclé de

Brouwer, 1938) 414, and S. H. Nasr, An Introduction of Islamic Cosmological Doc-

trines (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993) 219. Yet Ibn S •nå holds

essentially the same position as Mu˙ammad Waf å’ on this point. “Ibn S•nå recognizes

that the manifestation or epiphany accessible to any being . . . will depend on thatbeing’s capacity. So the manifestation is not identical with the Absolute Good, but is a

true (not “real”) expression of Him, as perfect as the limitations of each being allow.”

L. Goodman, Avicenna (London: Routledge, 1992) 33 fn. 33.

10. In his definition of ta˙q• q (verification), al-Qåshån• says that “the verifier is

neither veiled by al-Óaqq from creation, nor by creation from al-Óaqq.” A Glossary of

Technical Terms entry no. 485.

11. The Dår al-Kutub ms., 28b, has ˝@ÉijßH (beginning or opening) here, which

would seem to be a copiest’s mistake. By this “wearing down” the mystic’s carnal soul

may be controlled so that his spirit (r ¥˙) can rise upward. L. Massignon, The Passion of al- Ó allå j 3:347.

12. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 142b.

nty˜H M Rgÿ hƒ RüH ]dxy∆ nt;©H ! ‰n† hlikdƒ M [(?) D®mj©H.B / D®nj©H .Ú] M njs©H K¬ HCmøh¬ nt;©H M nty˜H‘|˚m;© ! M n´H vfug© §rf∂ ! H mˆ M ÔHMc©H NhtyjßH mˆ M Ú@ijßH F∆Hn¬ £@´ §g¨ Nhtyjß!H M Rühƒ RgÿH ]dxy∆˝hu†H NhtyjßH mˆ M NhjjßH E©he©H M |© Nmty¬ |˚H Nmuå ntyjslg© H mˆ M Ôhtw©H NhtyjßH Mˆ M ‰HnyjßH D˚he©H nfø

’...|stkƒ ! |ƒnƒ hdå!H D† |˚m… mˆ M




13. That is, to know of a Self-disclosure, rather than to know or simply see a Self-

disclosure.

14. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b al-azal 38–39.

]dˆh˜H ˝mwpƒ ! Dg[j©hƒ @lja¬ Ò mgu˜H |d† nizd† .Ôhf´%H &hkj¬H/HNM K¬ Ò mgu hƒ L gu©H Dgï ha;˚H Ón¬ ÛÚHNV%H‘L ;pƒ ,˝he˜H Hcˆ §g¨ ˝hrd† .|ƒ mˆ h¬ §g¨ |d† |©he¬ nizd† ]gƒhr H vk¨ |dg[j© Gƒh® Gp¬ |© M !˘ Ò mgu¬ K¬ hl† ...hidgï ˝mfr© vujs¬ ,ÚHNV%H D† ]f∆n¬ hi© M !˘ ]fªh¥ ]rdrπ K¬ hl† ,Hcˆ §gu† 0’K;ó £Vhπ‘ ÛDg[j©H Hcˆ

’.Kdduj©hƒ15. This recalls Ibn >Arab•’s claim that Self-disclosure takes form according to the

disposition of the recipient: ’.|© §g[j˜H VHvujßH Nmwƒ !˘ Hvƒı m;∂ ! ... Dg[j©H M‘ Fuß¥ß al-

˙ikam 61.

16. The First, or Primary, Intellect in traditional Neoplatonic philosophical cos-

mology is the first thing the Divine thought when It cosidered Itself. The resulting First

Intellect is the primary creative principle.

17. The Universal Soul is located below the First Intellect, from which it receives

the creative emanation.

18. Compare this to Ibn >Arab•’s position that the servant sees God in the form of his

own (predisposed) belief. Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 121: ’.*vrju¬ Nm∑ D† *Ón† *vf¨ Kdƒ M |kdƒ Ïh[üH U†N L ´‘19. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 100a.

|dlgu©H ]≈hπ !H Nm∑ |“M K¬ Dg[j©H ÷∑ntƒ &njøH Dˆhkj∂ ! hé Xdp˜H L gu©H Nm∑ Uœm© |d∆Hv©H VHN!H Ji“m∆ h˜‘§i©!H &Hvƒ!hƒ higƒHm® D† L gu©H Nm∑ Jx¨h† Ôh∑mwo¬ Ôhi[ƒ ÔHbdlj¬ *m“M K¬ Ôhd≈hπH ÔHn´m˜ Ôhdg… GƒHm®§† |¨m˚ „hoåH ÔHne;∆ M |st˚ Nm∑ UœM @… M flmπ M ÒVh… Ôhi¬H hßmt˚ M hƒÓ !mr¨ *m“m©H (read: *cˆ) Hcˆ K¬|ßvπ M naf©H Gr¨ Nmw∆ |k¨ Rdq∂ hó :©C nd¥ D©H |s˜ M |lå M |®MC U∂mk∆ M |g∑H U∂nt∆ D† Ôhfk©h… |sk“ ]≈hπH@… h;† hßmt˚ M !mr¨ |dg;©H Stk©H §† &vƒH |d©M!H |dƒ!H §† ˝M!H Gru©H H ]dge˜H Œn† Dg¨ ˝mrk† Hcˆ L i† HCh†]∑hÿH hi∆Nm∑ J˚h… hi∆nl´ ÔBnƒH M hij®NM M hikw¥ J“nøH HCH Ôhfk©H ]fp… |sk“ M |¨m˚ ]≈hπH M |st˚ §† hdg… hik¬St˚ M Gruƒ hl∂h® hik¬ G… h… ]u¬höH n[s©H nl´ ÒVÓ mkƒ J˚h… H hlg† hi© ]∂hy©H |f∆n˜H Dˆ M hi∆nl´ Kd¨ §† hi©F© n[å G… M ]¨vf¬ M ]¨njo¬ Di©!H Dg[j©H K¨ J˚h… Dj©H Ôhi¬!H M hƒ!H M |¨mkj˜H *m“m©H K¬ |“M nl´ Dˆ ML ©hu©H §©¨ L ;p∂ Gr¨ G;† HVv¬ vtk∂ ! M HVv¨ §ˆhkj∂ ! *m“M §† |∆Nmwƒ L ©hu©H Gwp† hi∆n[å G∑H hi∆nl´L g¨ v® G… ‰h†!H M Ú@†!H n∂hß D† :©c… M hi∆HNmw∆ ˇ@jøH §g¨ Gpk©H M Gg˜H *m“m… ... |d† Gwπ h¬ NmwƒÎc©H |“m©H mˆ Hcˆ M ˝mwt¬ Gw† G… M ˝m∑!H U¬h“ D® |xdp˜H n[a©H nl´ F© mˆ G¬h;©H Gru©H M |pdfs∆ M |∆@∑

’Xdp¬ °å G;ƒ |˚H !H ˝h® hl… M Nhwƒ!H ÚNv∂ mˆ M Nhwƒ!H |…Nv∆ !20. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 33b.21. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 50b.

22. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 38b. See also 50b.

nd¥ ˝B!H D† niΩ h¬ M |s;¨ |d† Kxƒ M vf¨ nd¥ vƒ!H D† niΩ hl† S;u©H M vƒ!H D† niΩ mˆ ˝B!H D† Kxƒ Îc©H‘’...niΩ Edπ K¬ Kxƒ Kxƒ Edπ K¬ niΩhl† ˝M!H G;å Kx˚ Îc©H M ÏN

23. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 27a–27b.

24. Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 276.

25. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 41b.


M Gelj©hƒ h¬H Gut©hƒ h¬H M Dg[j©hƒ h¬H Kduƒ !H HvƒH niz∂ ! Rgx˜H Fdy©H h† ... |kd¨ Då G… M °å G… Fd¥ |g©H‘D† K¬ L gu∂ ! G® |kd¨ D† Då G… Fd¥ flHN ÚNv˜H SüH ( nwƒ.B) nz˚ D˚vg©H L gu©H Nm˚ ‰nπ Dj¬ M ... Fd…nj©hƒ h¬HKd¨ Klπn©H M Klπn©H hrƒ M hs˚!H hk† h†nu©H D† M Klπn©H n∂nß hs˚!H M |g©H !H Fdy©H ŒN!H M ÔHmks©H

’... Då G… F∂¥The term > ayn may signal a number of different meanings, including “eye,” “entity,”

“essence,” “source,” or “identical with.”

27. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 154a.




28. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 98b.


30. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya Dår al-Kutub 2b.

’unclear ... |fspƒ Òhr¬ G… D† :d©H M :k¬ :¬mgu¬ !H :© Ta;k∂ !‘Al -Fåråb• echoes this idea (which doubtless had earlier Greek roots) when he says, “In

the intellect, the observing thing and the things observed are one.” G. Anawati, Étudesde philosophie musulmane (Paris: Vrin, 1974) 187.

’ .vπHM Dˆ hid©˘ Nmzk˜H / hdå$H M nΩhk©H °a©H Gru©H D† ˘ ˝mr˚ M‘31. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya Dår al-Kutub 50a.

M *Vmia˜ vˆha©H ]fp¬ m;∆ Gdl;j©H M ˝hl;©H V miå Nv® §g¨ M |rrπ h¬ ]rdrπ Rrp˜H M |†Mnu¬ Kd¨ ˇNhu©H‘ M Hn´H M hkd¨ |ƒ Rrë h¬ L ;pƒ Rrpj˜H NmiΩ m;∂ Rrpj©H Nv® §g¨ M |ƒmfpé Fp˜H Rrë m;∂ ]fp˜H ‰v∑ Nv® §g¨

... mˆ mˆ hé mˆ mˆ M Xdp¬ °å G;ƒ |˚H L dg¨ °å G;ƒ |g©HThe last phrase appears also in the writings of >Al• Waf å’. See his Kit å b al-waßå yå fols.

48a and 104b. Ibn S•nå used “ mˆ mˆ” to denote the identity of two things. See A.-M. Goi-

chon, Lexique de la lanque philosophique d’Ibn Sina 411.

32. In all the Waf å’iyya writings there is no explicit mention of Aritotle or the Arab

philosophers (e.g., Al-Fåråb•, d. 339/950, Ibn S•nå, d. 429/1037) who used this cosmol-

ogy, which saw the divine emanation take form as a series of spheres or intellects. For a

concise description of this cosmolgy see P. Heath, Allegory and Philosophy in Avicenna(Ibn S • nå ) (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992) 37.

33. Ibn >Arab•, I ß† ilå˙at al-ß¥ fiyya, 243 The text appended to Jurjån•’s al-Ta> r • f å t (Cairo: al-Óalab•, 1938) describes Jabar¥t: “According to Ab¥ ˇålib, it is the world of

Might []ÉÉÉlz¨], according to most it is the median world.” This “most” would include

Ibn >Arab•. In this model jabar ¥t functioned as a barzakh—and the Imaginal realm—

between mulk (the apparent world) and malak ¥t (the unseen world of meanings). See

Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 259–60, and The Sufi Path of Knowledge 282. Ab¥al-Óåmid al-Ghazzål• (d. 505/1111) held this view also. See Encyclopedia of Islam sec-

ond ed. s.v. “>Ålam,” and F. Jabre, Essai sur le lexique de Ghazali (Beirut: Publications

de l’Université Libanaise, 1985) 46, 256, 257.

34. Al-Qåshån•, A Glossary of Techinical Terms entries 284, 285, 286.

35. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 78a....M G“H F∆Hn¬ M §g¨ Ôht∑ M §ks¬ /hlßH K¬ Dg[j©hƒ Ïm“m©H Fd¥ Kduj∂ |d† M Nvr©H L ©h¨ bk… K¬ n¬!H ∏MN‘K¬ |d† h¬ Kduj∂ |ƒ M ]l;üH L ©h¨ bk… K¬ RgÿH∏MN M ...L gr©H M ∏mg©H M §ßn;©H M Ånu©hƒ @¨ !H @˜H Ôhd;g¬ÔHNwf¬ M Ôh¨mls¬ K¬ hid† h¬ M *nø!H M hd˚vg© M Ôm;g˜H M :g˜H hlˆ M ...]d˚hlsöH Nmw©H M |d˚hπMn©H ∏hfå!H

’Ôhßmsp¬ M36. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 150a.



39. “Two bows’-length” is an allusion either to Gabriel communicating revelation

to the prophet Mu˙ammad (Q. 53:9) or as is more likely in this context, Mu˙ammad’sdirect encounter with God.

40. That is, the divine Spirit, after it has been separated, at the event of creation,

from the One, or the spirit as separate from matter.

41. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 95a, 95b.

D˚hstk©H L ©hu©H mˆ M :g˜H E©he©H M D˚hπMn©H L ©hu©H mˆ M Ôm;g˜H D˚he©H M Di©!H L ©hu©H mˆ M ÔMnföH ˝M!H‘L ©h¨ mˆ M Ôm;g˜H D˚he©H L ©hu©H M Kdßm® Ïh® h… Îc©H |d† G∑hüH M |di©!H L ©h¨ mˆ M ÔMnföhƒ ˝M!H ÎNmw©H




E©he©H M :fg® §g Kd¬!H ∏Mn©H |ƒ ˝b˚ Fgr©H K¨ ˝bkj˜H §;g˜H Dπm©hƒ Vhtjs˜H mˆ M |dg∂nföH |d† G∑hüH M ∏Mn©H Xdp˜H L söH §† Bm…n¬ :g˜H L ©h¨ ...P©hw©H n¬!hƒ höH K∂nr©H |d† G∑hüH M ÔHv© mj˜H M h…N!H L ©h¨ mˆ M :g˜H

K¬ §adu˜H Gru©H M HmdüH M Ôhfk©H M vu˜H hik¨ v©mj˜H Hmi©H M ÏHnj©H M Nhk©H M /h˜H Dˆ M X∂hsf©H UƒN!H Òhs“!hƒ M |©hut©H mr©H M Stk©H M Gru©H |uƒN!H nˆHmöhƒ Xdp˜H mˆ M ‰Nht˜H ∏Mn©H D† Bm…n¬ Ôm;g˜H L ©h¨ M hs˚!H Woå bdlj˜H Rgx˜H Vm“m©H ]≈hπH D† Ò md® ÔMnföH L ©h¨ M §ßn;©H M Ånu©H M L gr©H M ∏mg©H (?) L ik¨ Vm“m˜H n¬!H ∏MN

’...Dg[j©H M Nmk©H M L ß!H M ]tw©hƒ ˝bkj˜ Xdp˜H |“m©H M RüH Vm“m©H M hdüH M L gu©H ]uƒN!H R∂hrühƒ42. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 81b.


44. This term seems to be an innovation of Mu˙ammad Waf å’s. On the philosoph-

ical term mushtarak , see A.-M. Goichon, Lexique de la langue philosophique d’Ibn

S • na 70 and Ibn S•nå, Livre des directives et remarques A.-M. Goichon trans. 317 fn. 5.

45. That is, the “common sense” synthesizes and organizes the data from the five

senses.

46. The clear horizon (Q. 81:23) recalls Gabriel’s revelation to Mu˙ammad, while

the Lote-tree is the sidrat al-muntahå (Q. 53:14), which is the limit of the Prophet’s

ascension towards God.


M .Únja˜H SüH M ,SlÿH n¨ha˜H ÛDˆ M Òhs®ı ]jß §©˘ L srk∂ D;g˜H M .D∆m;g¬ M D;g¬ §©˘ L srk∂ K;l˜h†‘Únja˜H Süh† .Únja˜H Gru©H M ,]∂n;t©H M ,n…Hc©H M ,]z†hüH M ,]gdoj˜H M ,]lˆmj˜H ÛÒhs®ı]jß §©˘ L srk∂ D∆m;g˜HÚnja˜H SüH M ,SlÿH n¨ha˜H ı ÛL g¨H M .ÔMnföH M Ôm;g˜H Kdƒ ØBnƒ Únjs˜H Gru©H M .Ôm;g˜H M :g˜H Kdƒ ØBnƒÒhiƒ˘ ∏hq∂˘ M hdƒ NHm˚ı (Li˚#) ÛÒh∂∫ƒ (Hmlß M) .ŒN#H M ÔHmls©H Kid† ]g©H Rgø Dj©H ]js©H Òh∂#H (L ˆ)∏hjt¬ Û nwf©H .∏hjt H mˆ vgr˜H M .QN!H M ÔHmls©H vd©hr¬ (L ˆ M) .Fd¥ ˇha;˚H M (here as per Azhar 105b)

.Slg©H :©c… M ...‰Mc©H M ... L a©H M .h Nm˚ M ,Ôh mls˜H KªHbø ∏hjt¬ Uls©H M .hi˚hdƒ M ,hˆNm˚ M ,Ôhdªn˜H KªHbøhˆNm∑ G∑hπ §ijk¬ M ,hikªHbø ˝hdÿH M .hi˚hd¨ı ]fd¥ ˝hπ D† hiz†hπ M ,hˆnœhπ M ,hiu¬h“ Únja˜H SüH M

NHm˚#H *cˆ M .]d;g H NHm˚#H *cˆ /HB≥ƒ ]d∆m;g˜H NHm˚#H :©c… M .§ijk˜H Nvß M ,Kdf˜H R†#H mˆ Hcˆ M .Vn[˜ ]d˚hπMn©H|g©H Kdƒ v® M .]rΩhk©H mr©H Dˆ M ,L gr©H K¨ ]œht˜H Nmwg© ]gƒhr©H |f∆Hn¬ U¬Hm“M .∏mg©H VHvujßH Rªhrπ na¨ Dk´!H

’./Då G… ˝he¬ ]jë Îc©H ,Ånu©H mˆ M ,|ƒN ˇn¨ vr† |st˚ ˇn¨ Kl† .]d¬V#H ]d˚hs˚%H ]osk©H D† :©C hdƒ48. This is Ibn S•nå’s position, distinct from that of al-Fåråb•. See R. Walzer, “Al-

Fåråb•’s Theory of Prophecy and Divination” in his Greek into Arabic: Essays on

Islamic Philosophy (Oxford: Bruno Cassier, 1963) 216–18.

49. These “comprehensions” equate with the concept of the ‘la†å ’if ’ (subtle sub-stances) of earler sufi thought. These substances—as spiritual rather than physical fac-

ulties—function as organs linking the human and divine worlds. Details of the

definitions of these substances vary; see H. Landolt, “Stages of God-cognition and the

Praise of Folly according to Najm-i Råz• (d. 1256)” in Sufi no. 47, 2000; Le Révélateur

des mystères 56 ff.; “Two Types of Mystical Thought in Muslim Iran” in Muslim World

no. 68, 1978, 196; and Elias, The Throne Carrier of God 157–60. The la†å ’if may also

be found in the model of creative divine emanation; see ibid. 72–75.

50. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktabat al-Azhariyya 72a, 72b.

51. A.-M. Goichon, Lexique 230. The polished soul (sirr ) looking at the Majesty of holiness ( janå b al-qudus) is similar. See Ibn S•nå, Al-Ishå r å t wa al-tanbihå t S. Dunya

ed. (4 vols.) (Cairo: Dår al-Ma>årif, n.d.) 4:92.

52. It is probably no coincidence that the earlier discussion of the “rational faculty”

and its position as the highest human point was to be found in his most “philosophical”

text, the Kit å b al-azal. This said, an interesting remark by L. Goodman—pointing out

that Ibn S•nå’s Active Intellect effectively does away with the idea of fanå ’ (extinction




into the divine)—is relevant to Mu˙ammad Waf å’. The latter after all does not explore

fanå ’ to the extent one might expect from a sufi thinker. This should be understood as

yet more evidence of the Waf å’s following Ibn >Arab•’s philosophical sufism, leaving

aside what we may call “psychological sufism,” and its concern with mystical states.

Goodman, Avicenna 19.

53. In the Naf å ’is al-> irf å n text, Gabriel is replaced by Jabar¥t.

54. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 154a, 154b,

and Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 76b.

55. The “teaching-shaykh” develops the theoretical principles of sufism, while the

“guiding-shaykh” serves as a director of spiritual discipline.

56. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 129b–30a. We

noted some of these definitions earlier.

57. A popular hadith among sufi writers is one attributed to the Prophet: “Assume

the character traits of God!” See Sufi Path of Knowledge 286–88.

58. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya, 87a.

M L i†Nhu¬ D† L i©hl H J“Nv H m†Nhu©H M L i©HmπH D† L i¬mg J“Nv˚H |d†mw©H M L i©hl¨H D† L i¬mg¨ J“Nv H Vhˆb©H‘ M Hmrgo∆ h¬ D† Hmrrë h¬ HMv“M |d†mw©H M Hmgl¨ hld† Hmlg¨ h¬ HMv“M Vhˆb©h† L ir∂hrπ D† L i©HmπH J“Nv˚H mrrp˜H

’.Hmrrë hld† Hmrgo∆ h¬ HMv“M mrrp˜H M Hm†n¨ hld† Hmgl¨ h¬ HMv“M m†Nhu©H59. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 84a, 84b.

|ƒmgx¬ §©H ]†hq˜H ‰@ø!hƒ Rgoj˜H mˆ §†mw©H |ƒ Rrë h¬ Hmk¨ Rrp˜H M ]†Mnu¬ Ôht∑ Ôhdgï Hn¬ ˇNhu©H |“M‘’.@r¨ M Vh¨ Gdpjs˜H Kdqdrk©H &hlj“H Vm“M U¬ !H Gwp∂ ! |©hl… Kd¨ UlöH M S∂vrj©hƒ

60. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 8a. Cf. Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-

Maktabat al-Azhariyya 100a.

61. A popular sufi saying, quoted by al-Qushayr• from Bas†åm•, runs, “He who

has no shaykh his master is Satan.” See al-Qushayr•, Das Sendschreiben al-Qushayr • s

über das Sufitum R. Gramlich trans. (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1989) 538.

62. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 99a, 99b.

.|odå ˇn¨ vr† |st˚ ˇn¨ K¬‘ ’.D©MH |ƒ hxda©h† D©m¬ |© Sd© K¬ M D©m¬ |© Sd© (sic) VhjßH |© Sd© K¬‘’.|ƒN vr† vr† |fg® v[∂ L © K¬ M |fg® v[∂ L © |odå v[∂ L © K¬ ÛSt˚


:rrπ M |©hrƒ :lg¨ K¬ :odå M J;ß Edπ Úv“MH M v“M HCH Úvr†H M Rx˚ HCH :fd¥ M J;ß HCH :ulßH K¬ :odå‘’... |©hl;ƒ :rp¬ M |©HMbƒ :jf´H M |©hpƒ


’...|k¬ nak∂ M |d† K†v∂ flc©H *nf® |f©h® M *VhjßH Jdƒ v∂nNH Fg®‘65. The Iranian mystic >Ayn al-Qu∂åt al-Hamadån• (d. 525/1131) noted that aspi-

rant is to contemplate God in the mirror of the spirit of his teacher. In turn, the teacher

will contemplate himself in the mirror of his disciple, as God contemplates Himself

through the mirror of creation. See Landolt, “Two Types of Mystical Thought in Mus-

lim Iran,” 197, and F. Jahanbakhsh, “The Pir-Mur•d Relationship in the Thought of

>Ayn al-Qu∂åt al-Hamadån•” in Consciousness and Reality: Studies in Memory of Toshihiko Izutsu J. Åshtiyån• et al. eds. (Leiden: Brill, 2000) 132.

66. >Al• Waf å’, al-Maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 3a.

67. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 100a.

’.*VhjßH ]d˚hlπN Hmjß! Ån¨ v∂n˜H Fg®‘The same verb is used in the Qur’an for God’s sitting on the Throne. See 7:54, 20:5 or

57:4.





’R∂hrüH K¬ *vˆhå hl¨ ‰Vhw©H |˚hsgƒ nfod† L söH L ©H m¨ K¨ *v∂nï vuƒ Vhjß!H |®Hn∂ R≈h˚ nfk¬ ‰Vhw©H v∂n˜H‘

69. In the previous “gem.” we are told that the “eloquent speaker (nå tiq) is he whospeaks by the tongue of his follower after his divesting (or purification).” Therefore, it

is the “eloquent pulpit” who “informs . . . of what he has witnessed of the realities” and

not the shaykh himself. This makes all the more sense when read in light of >Al•’s

implied claim to be the continuation of his father’s sanctity.

70. See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 68–70, for more detail and sources.

71. In our discussion of cosmology above, we saw that Mu˙ammad Waf å’ attrib-

uted this function to the Spirit of the divine Command.

72. Al-Qåshån•, A Glossary of Technical Terms entry 124.

73. Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:22. I have not been able to locate this within

Mu˙ammad Waf å’s own writings. As an aside, it should not surprise us that a poet

should have a vision in which possible existence is to the Necessary Divine as a

metaphor is to truth.

J˚ı /§å :ge¬ Sd© M Únd¥ §kus∂ ! |˚≥É® Îvk¨ :© NHvr¬! M NHvr¬ /§å G… vk¨ :© „mwo˜H hi∂ı RüH D© ˝h®‘’Bh[˜H D† Ò Mvu¬ ]rdrüH D† Vm“m¬ h˚ı M ÚBh[¬ /Då G… M Djrdrπ Kd¨

This “measure” recalls Q. 13:8, “Everything is before Him in its measure.” /Då G… M‘’NHvÉÉÉÉré *vk¨ Also of note here is the hadith quds• “My earth and My heaven embrace Me

not, but the heart of My believing servant does embrace Me.” (See Sufi Path of Knowl-

edge 396 fn. 20 for sources of this hadith.)

74. See Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 70–71, and the study by M. Takeshita, Ibn

> Arab• ’s Theory of the Perfect Man (Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and

Cultures of Asia and Africa, 1987).



77. Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God 289.


Rƒhs©H M ÔMnföH L ©h¨ §† @¨!H Ge H mˆ M §ksüH hlß!H R†H §† L z¨!H L dzu©H L ß!H mˆ ÔHc©H Ôht∑ ˇm∑m¬‘ M RgÿH L ©h¨ §† UœHm©H RüH M Ôm;g H L ©h¨ D† Ívr©H ∏MN mˆ M n¬!H L ©h¨ D† Xdp˜H ∏Mn©H M Ômf n©H L ©h¨ D® Ò mdr©H

’|g… n¬!H U“n∂ |d©H m;©H L ©h¨ §† Nmw©H Œhd† G¬h;©H hs˚!HA more typical sufi use of fy∂ , would be in the form fay∂ , which describes the effusion

from the Godhead. See, for example, Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge 162.

79. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 71, observes that the function of the Mu˙am-

madan Reality is in effect accomplished by the figure of the pole. It should be remem-

bered here that these various figures—and even their representatives—are largely

indistinguishable from the Mu˙ammadan Reality.

80. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 5b.

81. On the various sources for this hadith see Sufi Path of Knowledge 396 fn. 18.

82. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 25a.Dkƒ Ïmg® G… M niöH M ns©H NHv¬ |dg¨ M n¬!H M RgÿH |ƒ Òh® Îc©H Ò n…!H |∆HC |i“M M L z¨!H |g©H L ßH mˆ Fxr©H Fg®‘

’... ]r∆Hn©H M ]r∆ht©H |¬@®H M ]®Vhw©H |∆hlg… M ]r≈hk©H |jks©H L i† vπHM Fgr… |uƒh∑H K¬ Kduf∑H Kdƒ ÒVÓ 83. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 25b.

Ud†n©H /hlßH §g¨ Kldi˜H mˆ §©hu∆ |g©H L ßH H hl… Mbk©H hlßH §g¨ Kldi˜H mˆ M G“ M b |g©H L ßH K¬ ˝vƒ Fxr©H‘Kd¨ Mˆ §©hu∆ |ªhlßH K¬ L ßH G… hlßH Kdus∆ M ]us∆ Fxrg© :©c… hlßH Kdus∆ M ]us∆ §©hu∆ |g© H hl… M §g¨!H’|g©hƒ !H m® ! M ˝mπ @† *n;˚H K¬ M |g©H nqπ ˇn¨ |†n¨ Kl† |∆ht∑ M |ªhlßH §gï M |∆HC |πM M |k≈hƒ nˆhΩ M |fd¥




84. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 147a.


§©mj∂ hl… |stkƒ |d©M n¬H §©mj∂ flv©H mˆ ÛD©m©h† .„mwÿhƒ ndƒvj©H M ,nwf©H F“m∆ ÔHc©hƒ ]∑mwo¬ ]©ht… Û]∂!m©H‘|“mj∆ |d©H M ,Nhwƒ!H |…Nv∆ ! flc©H ,ÔHc©H |“M mˆ „mwo˜H §©m©H Û&n† .n∂hy˜H Qdufj… ! ,|k¬ mˆ |˚! ,|st˚ n¬H’Ôh∂hy©H Udl“ Rrpj∆ *vk¨ M ,ÔhiöH G… K¬ *m“m©H

86. See Bukhår•’s Sa˙•˙ Riqåq 38.

87. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 96a.

88. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n Dår al-kutub 17b, and al-Maktaba al-

Azhariyya 73a.

(*nøH .B) *vπH D† *vπHM Kxƒ M *vƒH D® ˝B!H ”Nv˚H Dlgu©H Vm“m©H |d©H §πMH M Kdßm® Ïh® §©H |ƒ flnßH hlg†‘’...vg∂ L © vlw©H |g©H vπH |g©H mˆ G® flnf;©H ]∂!m©H hs© §g∆ M vπ!hƒ (vπHm©H K¨ .B) vπHm©hƒ Vhπ!H JgyjåH MElsewhere in the Naf å ’is (75a) we read, “The One said, From every side I am the first

by Ra˙mån (the Merciful) and the last by Insån (humanity), and the Apparent (Ωå hir ) in

creation and the Interior (bå† in) in truth. So he who knows Me thus, and realizes Me in

all this, his last is gathered into his first and his apparent is counted among his interior

until he becomes eternal (azaliyyan), without an end to his first, and is everlasting

(ßamadiyyan), without an apparent to his interior.”

89. I understand this “tongue” to belong to the Prophet since the verb talå (to

recite), as used in the Qur’an, refers to the act of individuals relating God’s signs and

not the act of revelation itself.

90. The Maktaba Azhariyya ms reads: ]dƒmgß ]rdrπ (?).

91. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n Dår al-Kutub 17b, and al-Maktaba al-

Azhariyya 73a.

92. Hadith quds• not found in the traditional collections.

93. This seems to be a variant of ’L ;© Ônt¥ vr† ... Lj•å h¬ Hmgl¨H‘ Bukhår•, Sa˙•˙

Maghåz• 9.

94. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktabat al-Azhariyya 80a.

]dt∂nu∆ Ò mg¨ §©M!H H hikdƒ ‰nt©H M |dk∂v©H Ò mgu©H D† ]dfx® M ]d˚vg©H Ò mgu©H D† ]dfx® Kdls® §g¨ ]dfxr©H H L g¨H‘D† §©M!H ! S;u©hƒ |d˚vg©H D† M ]©hßn©H L ´ mfk©H L ´ ]∂!m©H F∆Hn¬ |Éeg´ §©H L srk∂ vπHM G… M ]dtdg;∆ flnø!H M

MH mˆ Jk… |jffπ HCh† ÔHc©hƒ h¬H |g©H *!m∆ K¬ D©m©H |d˚vg©H D† M |dˆHm˚ M *n¬HMhƒ (˝he˜hƒ .V) |g©H §©m∆ K¬ Ôh˚h∂v©HL ikdƒ UlöH M :© Nmty¬ Jdß h¬ Gu†H hu†!hƒ MH |ƒ nwf∂ Îv©H *nwƒ M |ƒ Uls∂ Îv©H |ulß Jk… |jffπH HCh† Ôhtw©hƒL dg¨ |g©H M ]∂Nhs©H ]∂mi©H U¬ ]©@öH ]“Nvƒ ]d˚hπMn©H ‰hl H D† ]∂Nhß ]dk∂v©H ]©hßn©H M ]d˚vg©H mfk©H ÚNv∂ ! ˝hl…

’]∂nqÿH M ]dßm˜H Kdƒ ‰nt©H L g¨ ÔhxÿH Hcˆ L i† HCH M NMvw©H ÔHcƒ95. We shall discuss the typology of these figures in the next chapter, in the sec-

tion “On Walåya and Nubuwwa.”

96. Al-Qåshån•, A Glossary of Technical Terms entry 55 (cf. 56) defines al-Jalål as:

Dˆ h¬ §g¨ vπH h Hn∂ ! |˚hpfß |∆HC h† |∆HC mˆ ˇnu∂ hl… |j∂mˆ M |jrdrpƒ |†nu˚ H |∆buƒ hk¨ §©hu∆ RüH Ïh[jπH’mˆ !H |dg¨

97. It should be remembered here that Ibn >Arab• saw all forms of sanctity as

derived from nubuwwa >å mma. See the last section of chapter 1 above.98. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 75b.

|“NV ‰m† mfk©H M |∆hœn¬ &hf∆H M |dˆHm˚ M *n¬HMH ˝hej¬hƒ |g©H §©mj∂ ! vfu©H Rd†m∆ hˆnˆhΩ K≈hƒ M nˆhΩ hi© ]∂!m©H‘|ƒ |g©H v∂H h¬ M Ôm;g˜H ]tåh;¬ M Ôhfdy˜H §g¨ &@≈!H M hf˚!H K¬ hdf˚!H |g©H Wwø hé :©C ‰m† ]©hßn©H M ]∂!m©H

M nˆhf©H ÔHb[u˜H M §©hu∆ |g©H §©H (m¨v©H .V) flm¨v©H §g¨ mr©H M ]l;ühƒ VHv¬!H M Ívr©H ∏MN ˝bk∆ K¬ Gßn©H M |ªhlßH mk;¬ K¬ |dg¨ |ug≈H M |∆Hcƒ *vf¨ |ƒ |g©H §©m∆ hé mi† ]k≈hf©H ]∂!m©H h¬h† :©C nd¥ §©H nˆhz©H Ô!!v©HDˆ ]∂!m©H *cˆ M mˆ !H mˆ ! M mˆ ! mi† |ƒ *hrƒH M |k¨ *hk†H M |k¬ *cøh† |∆hdgï Ív® n∂hzπ §† *nqπH M |∆ht∑




§˚VH MHKdßm® Ïh® Òhr¬ §† hiƒ h… M §ijk˜H Nvß vk¨ G∂nf“ |®Nh† h˜ L gß M |dg |g©H §g∑ vlp¬ hid©H §®n∆ Dj©H Nvr©H L ©h¨ §† ]©hßn©H M mfk©H M ]∂!m©H M |∆mf˚ Òhr¬ MV ]©hßn©H M |j∂!M Òhr¬ MV |“m©H Hvˆ K¬ mfk©H J˚h… M

’h;¬!hƒ D˚he©H M Vm“m©hƒ ˝M!H Fd∆nj©H Hciƒ L ;üH Hcˆ §g¨99. On this idea of the inversion of the two orders, according to Óaydar Åmul•,see H. Corbin, En Islam Iranien I:260ff.

100. This Renewer of religion (mujaddid al-d • n) is not mentioned in the Qur’an

but does have a basis in hadith (see Ab¥ Då’¥d, Sunan 4/156). Landau-Tasseron, “The

‘Cyclical Reform’: A Study of the Mujaddid tradition,” Studia Islamica 70, 1989 tells

us that “Discussion of tajd • d is mainly conducted in personal not in conceptual terms.

(Our) conclusion is that tajd • d was not a central concept in the evolution of medieval

Islamic thought; it was rather an honorific title bestowed on individuals over the ages,

and the conceptual aspect was secondary, involving mainly the qualifications of the

candidates” (p. 84). However, Mu˙ammad Waf å’s late contemporary, the historian Ibn

Khald¥n, tells that speculation on the Mahdi was common in his time. “Most of our

contemporary Sufis refer to the (expected) appearance of a man who will renew the

Muslim law and the ordinances of the truth. They assume that his appearance will take

place at some time near our own period.” Ibn Khald¥n, The Muqaddima: An Introduc-

tion to History F. Rosenthal trans. (3 vols.) (New York: Bollingen, 1958) 2:195. Lan-

dau-Tasseron also concludes that the rise of the hadith of the Renewer was historicallly

tied to defence of the teachings al-Shåfi>• (pp. 97 ff). See also Y. Friedmann, Prophecy

Continuous (University of California Press, 1989) ch. 4. It is also interesting to note that

the Maghrebi, al-Jaz¥l• (d. 869/1465), would associate the mujaddid and the Mahdi.See V. Cornell, Realm of the Saint 184.

101. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 92b, 93a.

102. Ab¥ Dåw¥d, Sunan, Malå˙im 1.

103. A hadith popular in sufi texts. See The Sufi Path of Knowledge 396, fn. 20.

104. A reference to S¥rat al-Fåti˙a, the first verse of the Qur’an, perhaps called

the “Seven oft-repeated” because it is used in prayers. Reference to the Fåti˙a, some-

times called the “mother of the Book,” may be a metonymic reference to the Qur’an. In

15:87 we read, “We have given you the Seven oft-repeated and the great Qur’an” (L dzu©H

Ónr©H M D˚he˜H K¬ hÉufß Úhkd∆Ó v® M). Qur’anic commentators, for example Tafs• r al-Jalå lain,gloss the Seven as the Fåti˙a. The traditionist al-Bukhår• understands the mathå n• as the

Qur’an itself; thus sab> an min al-mathå n• means seven verses out of the Qur’an, and wa

al-Qur’å n al-> aΩ• m refers to the rest of the Qur’ån. For more on this see U. Rubin,

“Exegesis and Hadith: The Case of the Seven Mathån•” in Approaches to the Qur’å n G.

Hawtig ed. (London: Routledge, 1993).

105. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 135b, 136a.

h… hé M |˚HMH hd¨H M |˚h¬B ØhdåH L ˆ! mi† .../Då G… hik¨ ‰hœ M ]†nu˜hƒ ]rdrüH |fg® UßM Îc©H K¬m˜H m Hcˆ M‘flvˆ Ò!¨H (read: T©H) ht©H mufß |˚h¬B §† L ik¬ vπHM G;© h… (]ufß .B) ]kß ]∂h¬ G… ÍHN §©¨ Nmiz©H Hcˆ

’...Nm˚M ]lgΩ K¬ Ïh[π T©H mufß |g© H §ke˜H Ufs©H nß L it∂ hkˆ K¬ M Hvj®!H NHm˚H ‰Nha¬MOn the sources for the last hadith see the discussion in Le Révélateur des mystères 111

fn. 176. See also Isfaråyin•’s discussion, ibid. 130 ff, according to which all veils, whether

they be of divine or human origin (base or noble), must be passed through along the

mystic path.

106. The eight throne-bearing angels and the “day of Assembly” are to be found

in Qur’anic descriptions of the Day of Judgment (e.g., 69:17).




107. The Muslim community.

108. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 71a,71b.

L gu©H M hdüH Dˆ M ÔHc©H Ôht∑ Ôhdgï nˆhz¬ L ˆ É∂c©H D˚he˜H ]ufs©H É¬ @e¬ |h©H Ïnœ ]ufs©H Òh∂!H J˚h… h˜ M‘Ôhtw©H ˇm∑m¬ M hlß!H §ls¬ ÔHc©H Dgï niz¬ M L dzu©H Hnr©H L ´ Ò@;©H M nwf©H M Uls©H M VHN!H M Nvr©H M M Jke˚H L ´ hˆn¬H hlß G… D† §πMH M |∂ Mhls©H n¬HM!H Ufs©H §©H J© bkj† Jke˚H M |dånu©H ]glüH |d˚hle©H J©bk∆ L ´Ò m∂ mˆM L gß M |dg¨ |g©H §g∑ vlp¬ D† Ôni L ´ §sd¨ M hldgß M VMHV M §ßm¬ M L dˆHnƒH M ∏m˚ M ÒVÓ D† J©bk∆]∂h¬ G… ÍHN §g¨ |g©H Euf∂ ]¬vrj˜H ]ks©H L ;π §g¨ |∂vlπ!H ]g˜H M |d¬!H ]¬!H D† Jke˚H L e hˆn¬H Òhz˚ M hiul“vüH M U©hx©H nˆhf©H Nmk©H M U¬höH É¬he©H niz∂ |∂háhle©H §©H §jπ |∂˚hfxr©H ]rdrπ »cˆM L ik∂V ]¬!H »ci© Vv[∂ @“N|∂vlp˜H ]∂vlπ!H ]g˜H M |d¬!H ]¬!H É¬ D˚hu˜H M hd¨!H D† hir∂hrπ Òhz˚ L ¸h˚ M D˚he˜H Ufs©H L ∆hø U˚h˜H U¬höH&ml[¬ Ò m∂ :©C Vmp“ ! M |d† F∂N ! Îc©H UlöH Ò m∂ mˆ M L dπn©H Élπn©H |g©H L sƒ §ls˜H L dzu©H Hnr©H mˆ

’VMia¬ Ò m∂ :©C M Íhk©H |©109. This “great” revelation is probably more than simply the scripture of the

Qur’an. It seems to represent here the first extension into creation. This presentation

recalls the Sh•>• concept of the Imåms as the Qur’å n nå† iq. Amir-Moezzi, The Divine

Guide in Early Shi> ism 167, fn.198.

110. This ensemble of seven prophets is apparently not that found sequentially in

the seven levels of heaven by the Prophet in his ascension. There the list is the follow-

ing: Adam, Jesus, Joseph, Idr•s, Aaron, Moses, and Abraham (in the seventh heaven).

Bukhår•, Sa˙•˙, Salåt, 1. In the final section of the next chapter we will discuss this dis-

crepancy in more detail.

111. This phrase, known as the basmala, has served in numerous mystical specu-

lations among sufi thinkers. For example, Ibn >Arab• contrasts its first letter Ï (identify-

ing it with the Unitary Divine Principle) with the last word of the Qur’an, nå s (which

sybolizes Universal Manifestation) See M. Chodkiewicz, An Ocean without Shore: 67.

Mu˙ammad Waf å’s contemporary, Óaydar Åmul•, in his commentary on Ibn >Arab•’sFuß¥ß, proposes the basmala as a structure for both the interior and exterior worlds. See

Corbin, En Islam Iranien 4:177.

112. In the next chapter we shall see that >Al• Waf å’, living at the turn of the ninth

century, claims to be this Renewer. Ibn >Arab• himself, significantly, had made the

claim in his Kit å b al-isr å ’: “I am the Qur’ån and the Seven oft-repeated.” Addas, Quest

for the Red Sulfur 116.113. Cf. (Q.6:67): “For every tiding there is an abode (or time), and you shall know

of it.” ’mlgu∆ ˇmß M nrjs¬ hf˚ G;©‘ The word tidings may refer to stories of the prophets

(e.g., 26:69, 28:3) or to God’s tidings from the Unseen world (eg., 3:44, 12:102).

114. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktabat al-Azhariyya 82b.

M ... ∏m˚ |ƒ hf˚H h¬ nrjs¬ L dˆHnƒH M ÒVÓ (|ƒ hf˚H h¬ nrjs¬ ∏mk† |k¨ hf˚H .B) M |ƒ hf˚H h¬ Édu∆ Edπ hf˚ G… nrjs¬‘Îvlp˜H hf˚!H ÔHnrjs¬ L ˆ É∂c©H n® G… ÍHN §g¨ m´muf˜H ˝h“n©H :©c… M UlöH nrjs¬ L gß M |dg¨ |g©H §g∑ vlp¬

’L dπn©H Élπn©H |g©H L sƒ §ls¬ M L dzu©H hfk©H nrjs¬ UlöH U¬h“ Éd¨ M nwu©H Ljø É¬he©H É¬b©H Fπh∑ MThe last phrase, “In the Name of God . . .” begins the Qur’an and most suras. Its

use in our passage may be taken as a reference to all revelation.115. Al-Qåshån• understands the Prophet, as the ˙aq• qa Mu˙ammadiyya, to unite

within himself the qualities of the seven great prophets. See P. Lory, Les commentaires

esotériques du Coran d’après > Abd al-Razzå q al-Qå shå n• (Paris: Les Deux Océans,

1980) 140.

116. This model of cycles and their final fulfillment are not unlike that of the

early Ismå>•l•s, who waited for the Na† iq (speaker) or Qå ’im / Mahd • . See F. Daftary,




The Ismå>• l• s, Their History and Doctrines (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1990) 140.

6. Sanctity according to >Al• Waf å’

1. See his Talb• s Ibl• s (Beirut: Maktabat al->Aßriyya, 1999).2. H. Laoust, Essai sur les doctrines sociales et politiques de Taq• al-D• n Ibn

Taym• ya. On some of the Egyptian responses to Ibn Taymiyya see E. Geoffroy, LeSoufisme en Égypte et en Syrie 446–50.

3. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:45 from >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå Sayyid • > Al•

Waf å ’ (Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale; ms no. 1359) 26a.’. . . Òvu©H !H»vuƒ SÜ© CH mˆ !H Hvf¬ hi© SÜ© M |jt∑ Vm“m¬ G… M Vm“m¬ G… ÔHC mi†‘

The entry in al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å on >Al• Waf å’ is made up of quotations taken largelyfrom the Waßå yå and Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya. The passages are often shortened,and many have been arranged thematically. It appears, however, that not everythingSha>rån• quotes is from these two works. (The Waßå yå manuscript available to me wascopied in 984/1576, that is, well after Sha>rån•’s death. Perhaps the earlier Waßå yå copySha>rån• used was larger.)

4. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 26b, 27a. (Partially quoted by Sha>rån• 2:45.) This ontologyis similar in form to Mu˙ammad Waf å’s discussion of tajall• and isti> d å d , as we saw in

the previous chapter. A structural comparison with Ibn >Arab•’s a> yå n thå bita (immutableentities) remains to be done.5. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:45. The term Absolute Oneness is used by

Ibn al-Kha†•b (d. 776/1374) and Ibn Khald¥n (d. 808/1406), representing the school of thought that sees God’s existence as the only reality. This school is distinguished fromthat of the aß˙å b al-tajall• , who recognize the reality of Self-disclosure in addition to thatof God. The issue at hand is what significance is to be attributed to the various differen-tiations of the divine One. The first position would give none, while the second sees valuein recognizing the destinctions the One makes within itself (e.g., the Self-disclosures).For a discussion of this issue see H. Landolt, “Le Paradoxe de la “Face de Dieu”: ‘Azîz-eNasafî (VIIe/XIIIe siècle) et le “Monisme Ésotérique” de l’Islam” in Studia Iranica vol.25/2 1996, 165.

6. “This is deficient with respect to the positions of the verifiers. In this [passage],the Shaykh is as one deprived of the demonstrations witnessed from his own utterancesin [other] passages of his Waßå yå ; but God knows best.” Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:45.UœHm¬ D† |¬@… ]f∂nrƒ viå h¬ NhiΩ˘ §g¨ Ïmgy˜h… hiÜ† OÜa©H h;† KÜrrp˜H F∆Hn˜ nzk©hƒ ÷wr˚ ]f∆n¬ §ˆ M‘

’L g¨ı |g©H M hŸh∑m©H *cˆ K¬7. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya (Dår al-Kutub; Taßawwuf 152; film

33564) 45a. °å G… °å G… ÔHC mˆ M °å G… ]rÜrπ mi† Nm∑ M §ku¬ |“Hm¬hƒ npf©H mˆ hlÜ† ]≈hπh… XÜp¬ °å G;ƒ |˚H‘

’|jt∑ M |kÜ¨8. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:29.9. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:51.

§g¨ *vfuÜ† hlˆ M |ƒ ntzŸ Nh∆ M ]tåh;¬ K¨ *vfuÜ† hrπ |ƒ ntzŸ Nh∆ K;© RüH !˘ F©h≈ G… FgxŸ L © ˝mrŸ h… M‘’|g©H !˘ ]rÜrüH §† vƒh¨ vf¨ hl† Ïh[π




10. >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-Maså mi> al-rabbå niyya (Dår al-Kutub; Taßawwuf 166)

50a, repeated in Waßå yå 104b.

11. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:43.’˝hl;©H !˘ Vm“m©H §† viaŸ L © Nm¬#hƒ L ªhr©H mˆ ÷ßMvr©H ı viå K¬‘From the Waßå yå 13b, a similar passage:

’!hl… !H n¬!H:©C via∆ L © n¬hƒ L Ÿhr©H mˆ ÒHn…!H M ˝@öH MC Ívr©H H Ôvˆhå HCH‘12. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 98a, 98b.

M *MhlßH M |∆ht∑ G;©h† VM“m¬ G;ƒ KÜuj H ÔHc©H Vm“m©H mˆ . . . |kÜ¨ §kulƒ *Vm“M J˚H M :∆HC §kulƒ ÚVm“M mˆ‘’|fspƒ Òhr¬ G… D† |¬Hm® Gl;∂ M Vm“M©HÒhz˚ Pgw∂ ]Üi©!H |jf∆n¬ L ;pƒ

13. Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 23b. ’:Ü©H M :ƒM |k¬ G;©h† ÚVm“M mˆ G;©H Vm“M h… HCH‘14. Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 101a.

Nhj† Ôhtw©H M D˚hu˜H(sic)

Ul“Hcˆ §g¨ S® M |jÜ˚hlπnƒ :˚hlπN M |jÜi©hƒ :i©H M |jÜƒmƒnƒ :ƒN mˆ ÚVm“M‘Dj©H ]ÜeÜüH K¬ ]∆Nh∆ M ÚVm“M hik¬ *Hn∆ M J˚H hˆHn∆ Dj©H ]ÜeÜüH K¬ :…HNVH D† hiquƒ MHF∆Hn˜H *cˆ L ;pƒ :© niz∂ M niΩ TÜ… M niΩ EÜπ Vm“m©H :© niz∂ ! (*) CHÚVm“M !H ]rÜrüH D† mˆ h¬ M ÚnÜ¥ Vm“M hik¬ *Hn∆ M ÚnÜ¥ hˆHn∆|˚HEÜπ K¬ |…HNVhƒ :©c© ÚNv˜H ÚVm“M |˚hƒ !H |k¬ °å ! M :©C ÚNv∆ ! J˚H M ÚVm“M mˆ EÜπ K¬ !H niΩ hlié

’XÜp¬ °å G;ƒ |˚H !H Hcˆ ˇ@ø °å L ´ h¬ ÚNv H ÚVm“MAl-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:56 quotes this passage, but only after (*).

15. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 13b reads:

’ÚVm“M K¬ !H ÚVmiå §† h¬ M ÚVmiå §©H !H Vm“M K¬ hl†‘16. Ibn Sab>•n (d. 669/1270) and his disciple >Af •f al-D•n Tilimsån• (d. 690/1291)

both knew Ibn >Arab•’s disciple Sa∂r al-D•n al-Q¥nåw•. Tilimsån• had met Ibn >Arab• in

Damascus and had for a time been a disciple of al-Q¥nåw•. See C. Addas, Quest for the

Red Sulphur 257–58.

17. This is a variant of the hadith Tirmidh•, Sa˙•˙, Imåm, 18.

18. Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 2b, 3a.

Gq *hxøH K¬ M flvjˆH Nmk©H :©C |ƒh∑H Kl† *Nm˚ K¬ hûiÜg¨ ÅN L ´ ]lgΩ §† ÒhÉs“!H Rgø |g©H H E∂vüHD† h“‘hiÜg¨ ÅMåN˜H Nmk©H M L Üif©H L ˆ m©H hijÜ˚h¬n“ EÜπ K¬ hi˚ha† Òhi∂H M Òhi˚HF∆Hn¬ hi˚H ]lgΩ Òhs“!H m… §ku¬hi∆HVHvujßH §g¨ ]åmån˜H ∏HMN!H*cˆ §g¨ Òhs“!H M L Üπn©H Klπn©H Vm“m©H §gï K¬ L Ü;üH L Ügu©H R≈hk©H ∏Mn© mK¬ n∂ L © Kl… NMns©H v[∂ L © M ijf∂ L g† |ƒhr˚ !H|“m©H :©C K¬ n∂ L © Kl† nl®H if¬ |“M §g¨ nf¥H VmßH Ïhrk…

’Vmwr˜H vˆha¬ vk¨ NMns©hƒ ijƒH Nmjs©H Ta… K¬ M Nm…c˜H Nm˚ Vmia© |g©H n…c∂ L g† L i¬hs“H !H |g©H hÜ©MH19. Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 20b. ’|fspƒ Òhr¬ G… D† §ls˜H Kd¨ L ß!H‘20. Ibn >Arab• used “Qur’ån” and “Furqån” (both names for scripture) to explain

the at once uniting and differentiating function of God’s word. See Chittick, Sufi Path of

Knowledge 363.

21. Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 21b.

|kd¨ Ónr©H M Ò@;©H mˆ M L g;j H mi† ]∂‡H Ïhj;ƒ L ˆ hkd“ v® M h® hl… ]duls©H n∂Hv©H D† L g;j H Kd¨ Ò@;©H . . .‘ M Ónr©H ˝bk∆ h®nt©H M h®nt©H ˝bk∆ Ânr hÉÊ DsüH |kd¨ *Hnr∆ ndlqƒ |k¨ nfu˜H Ânr˜H M D©hdÿH |kd¨ h®nt©H M Dgru©H

’Ò@;©hƒ |k¨ nfu˜H |dgï Gl[¬ ]dgdwtj©H |∆hkdu∆ G;©H M L g;j˜H Kd¨ Ò@;©H M Ò@;©H ˝bk∆ Ónr©H22. Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 35a. ’‰HBn©H Ôhdgï ‰Bn©H ÏhfßH M ‰@ÿH Ôhdgï RgÿH Ïhfßh®‘

23. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 22b.24. At the beginning of this chapter we saw >Al• Waf å’ using the related term taqd • r

(ordaining) to convey much the same point being made here.

25. This seems to be a version of another hadith, popular among sufi thinkers,

which many hadith scholars have considered a forgery. See Chittick, Sufi Path of Knowl-

edge 391 n. 16.

26. An interpretation traditionally ascribed to the Prophet’s companion Ibn >Abbås.

See Chittick, Sufi Path of Knowledge 150.




27. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:55.

Nh´‡H hpƒ n¨ı h… K¬ G;† . . . *Nh´Ó nˆjz¬ D† |∆ht∑ M |ªhlßı Gdwtjƒ RüH nuj© !˘ RgÿHnªHV Jrrπ h¬ ˝mr∂‘

Nv® §g¨ nˆhz˜H :g∆ Rªhrpƒ n¨ı h… m∑m˜H §ls˜H nˆhzé n¨ı h… K¬ G… M Ôhtw©H M /hlß#Hnˆhzé ˇn ı h… ’0nˆhz©H Rªhrühƒ |j† nu¬28. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:32.

29. Mu˙ammad Waf å’ himself is this elite. See the quotation at the start of the sec-

tion “The Mu˙ammadan Reality and the Pole” in the previous chapter.




33. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 21a, 21b.

]rdrpƒ ! ]d…HNV!H ]dl;üH hi∆hdˆh¬ VMvpƒ n∂hyj¬ ÔHVm“m˜H M |∆HVm“m¬ §©H ]fsk©hƒ nde… ÔHc©hƒ vπHM Vm“m©H‘Ôhûdˆh˜H VMvπ §©H Ônz˚ §jÉ¬ M HvπmÉ¬ Jk… |Ék©H |∆HVm“mÉ¬ nÉ¬H ÔVVN M Vm“m©H ]ÉrÉdÉrπ §©H Ônz˚ §jl† hˆVm“MK¬ |ƒ Glu∂ H]l;üH §qjr∆ hé n∂HV G… §® Jlg¨ §j¬ M HVvu¬ Jk… (read hid©H) |Éd©H hˆVm“M nÉ¬H ÔVVN M ]ÉdÉl;üH

’HVvs¬ Hvdß @¬h… Jk… hi© :rdrë U¬ n∂Hv©H :g∆ D® K∂nzk©H Ôhdqjr¬The figure of the Perfect Sayyid will be discussed in more detail at the end of this chap-

ter, in the section “The Seal and the Renewer of Religion.”


35. This insight is also described in Ibn >Arab•’s Fut ¥˙å t as the “Possessor of the

Two Eyes.” See Chittick, Sufi Path of Knowledge 361–63.

36. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:33. See al-Qushayr•, Das Sendschreiben

al-Qushayr • s über das Sufitum 538.


38. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2I:33.

’|©Hm®ı §˚hu¬ L ˆmjƒ ]rƒhx˜H vr† |©hu†ı §† |t©hø K¬M |†Nhu¬ K¬ |© nføı hld† |rƒh≈ |©hu†ı D† *Chjßı R†HM K¬‘39. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:33. ’... *Chjßı ]d˚hlπN /Hmjß! Ån¨ ‰Vhw©H v∂n˜H‘

We saw a similar statement from Mu˙ammad Waf å’ in the previous chapter in the sec-

tion “The Teaching Shaykh and Beyond.”

40. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 39a.

§©H ‰ma©H M Fgx©H ]®nπ M v“m©H]¨m© vï L © §j¬ cdlgj©H St˚ Hc;ˆ GlüH Òv¨ D† Ffß L πn©H Vnƒ Hhf≈!H˝h®‘

h˚høV!H Sfr©H |d† n´m∂ ! VNhf© Vm®m©H Ge¬ hq∂H m;∂ M *n¬H Nm∑ hidg¨ *VhjßH ÷qd† K¬ hid† v©mj∂ L © Vmwr˜H’... Rmå ]®nπ ndyƒ Ò mr©hkdƒ ]gøHv©H Ímtkg© ]g∑hüHÔh˚m¨n©H M ÎMh¨v©h…


’ÚChjßhƒ :j†nu¬ Nv® §g¨ :jrdrpƒ :j†nu¬‘42. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 3a.

Sdg† /Då G… Ôv“M |g©H Ôv“M H M |g©H Ôv“M :jrdrπ Ôv“M H M :jrdrπ Ôv“M Rrp˜H ÚVhjßH Ôv“M H...‘’Vhjß!H Hcˆ v“M D† !H VHn˜H G…

43. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:49, and >Al• Waf å’, Waßå ya 54b.

h¬ v∂n˜H ı êfj† ... *Chjßı K¨ Jtjg∂ ! ı M *Chjßı n¬ı vk¨ Tr∂ ı v∂n˜H §gu† *v∂n˜ ]dƒnƒn©H nß niz¬ Chjß$H‘

Edπ K¬ |i“M |g©H h… hlidjf∆n¬ Kdƒ n∂hy˜H L ;π Xrß M *Chjßı ]rdrpƒ Rrë HC˘ §jπ *Chjßı !˘ |d©˘ |“mj∂ |“M |©’...v∂n˜H :©C |ƒ Rrë flc©H Chjß#H :©C |“ M

44. A sign of the Last Day is a blast on this Trumpet, (Q. 69:13). The famous al-

Óallå j said, “By God! it is the breath of the uncreated Spirit that breathes into my skin

a thought, the very one that Isråf •l will blow into the Trumpet.” L. Massignon, The

Passion of al- Ó allå j 1:285. Massignon then adds the following quote from Ibn Båkhilå:

“When the Trumpet sounds, the sincere mystic will say, I heard it a long time ago!”





|π@∑ Nm∑ flıN *Chjßı K¨ |∆Ndwf© Ta… HChÉ† ]∂!M©H M ∏@t©H Gˆı Ôhlsƒ |j∂M≈ §gpj∆ ı v∂N˜H/flVhf¬ ˝M∫É† ...‘|llˆM ]d©Hmj˜H|jzπ@¬ Ôh…Nƒ K¬ vljsd† §©M©H P©hw©H mˆ *Chjßı ıRxkd† *Chjßı Nm∑ /ht∑ §† |j∂!M M

]∂hku©H Gd†Hnß˘ Otk∂ §jπ S˚∫ûj˜H VVm∆ |d©˘ VVmjd† ]t∂na©H *n≈Hmø [ M ]tdk˜H |∆Hm¨VChjß#H K¬|fgx¬ Hb∂ ! M ]d©hu©HÏha©H L dzu∆ |lzud† Hm…#H ]¬Bı :©h¬ M h¬b©H ÒVÓ *Chjßı via∂ Úhki† D¬V‡H ÷wdwoj©H ∏MN |fg® Nm∑ Nm∑ D†h∂vlp¬ Hvdß *Chjßı via∂ Úhki† ]∂vlp˜H ∏Mn©H K¬ |wø h¬ ˝hl“ K¨ ]d¬V‡H|∆Nm∑ Ïh[π nts∂ ı §©˘ Ïhi˜H |dƒ#Kdƒh¬v¨ ndwd† vˆha©H UßM Nv® §g¨ via¬ G… §† §g[j∂ vπHm©H !˘ fln∂ @† *Chjßı §©˘ nzkd† ... Hvf¨ |© m;∂ M

’...Rdrë *nøÓ M R∂vw∆ |xßMı M Rd†m∆ *n¬ı ˝M∫† Vmiå nqπ §† Hmp¬ M Vm“M flv∂46. Ab¥ Madyan, “Uns al-wa˙•d” no. 161 in The Way of Ab¥ Madyan 147.

Nh˚ı M |®Hn≈≥ƒ :ƒVı M |®@ø∫ûƒ :ƒcˆ K¬ Oda©H 0L dzuj©H M ÒHnjπ!hƒ Únß M L ∂vrj©hƒ :∆HC |© Ôviå K¬ Oda©H‘’*Nm˚ Nh´Ó Fdy¬ D† :ztπ M *Nmqπ D† :©l“ K¬ Oda©H 0|®Hnåhƒ :k≈hƒ

47. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 12b.

hrƒhx¬ |st˚ K¬ Ón˜H D† nΩhk©H *Hn∂ h¬ ]©bké *ChjßH K… ÷∑mwo˜H v∂n˜H ]rdrπ‘48. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:32.

49. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 3b.

’Rπ J˚h† hrπ |∆viå H M Rgø J˚h† hrgø |∆viå H ... hidg¨ ÚChjßH via∆ Dj©H Nmw©H §g¨ J˚H‘50. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:32.

’... |∆n∂nß Nm∑ §g¨ hˆviå |∆ndwfƒ hid† nz˚ HC˘ ‰Vhw©H v∂n˜H nß Ón¬ R≈hk©H Chjß#H Nm∑‘51. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:60.


Ôniz† D© @ˆı :j∂ıN :jffπı HC≥û† :fπı §jπ §©˘ Ïnr∆ ‰Vh∑ v∂n¬ G;© ˝mr∂ Kdf˜H Rühƒ R≈h˚ Chjßı G… ˝hπ hs©‘’|© vujs¬ J˚ı hé :d†

Apparently sincere aspirants were not very common. In 804/1401>Al• Waf å’ wrote,

“To date I have not found an aspirant who approaches the reality of his truth in me

(Îvk¨ |ÉÉÉrÉÉÉπ ]ÉÉrÉÉÉdÉÉÉrÉÉÉπ) by supererogation so that I love him. If I found him, I would ful-

fill him in his truth, then (I would say) “I love you” and I would be him ( mˆ Jk;†). How

my aspirant would excell in conformity (to me) and perfection!” ( Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in

al-> aliyya 11a, 11b and al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:60) This passage echoes the hadith in

which the servant draws near to God by acts of supererogation until God loves him and

becomes his hearing, sight etc. (Bukhår•, Ía˙•˙, Riqåq 38).


h¬ ‰Vhw©H v∂n˜H hi∂Hhd† h;¬H Vm“M ]dlgu©H |jrdrü Dgut©H ˝he˜H M Dƒm“M Vm“M Dgut©H hi©he˜ ]dlgu©H ]rdrüH‘hi† !H M hrπ ˝b∆ L © hl… Jk… |ƒ Jrrë h† df˜H Rühƒ R≈hk©H ÚChjßH vk¨ !H Rπ |ƒ J˚H Îc©H F“Hm©H ÚVm“M

’hrgø ˝Hb∆ ! J˚H54. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:55, and >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 95b.

G;©H D† Vm“m©H M v∂n˜H §©˘ ]fsk©hƒ v∂n˜H Vm“M ]rdrπ Chjß#H M *Chjßı §©˘ ]fsk©hƒ *Chjßı md¨ K¬ Kd¨ v∂n˜H ˘‘ M HVmiå Kd†nuj H ÚNHv¬ §† *v∂né Chjß#H Rrpj∂ M HVm“M hl;©H §˚hu¬ §† *Chjß∫ƒ v∂n H Rrpj∂ :©c© M Xdp¬ vπHM

’Dg¨ h∂ :k¬ h˚ı M Dk¬ J˚ı‘ G¬h;©H *v∂n˜ G¬h;©H vds©H ˝h® L ´ K¬A similar passage, using “servants” and “masters”, is Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 8a,

8b. It ends with the following: “Just as the servant is from his master in existence, like-

wise the master is from his servant in witnessing. “You are from me, and I am fromyou.” On this hadith see above, ch. 4, note 88. Ibn Må ja, Sunan (Cairo: 1972) vol.1, båb

2, p. 44, no.119 runs, “I am from >Al• and >Al• is from me.” (This passage is also cited

in Sha>rån• 2:60.)


L i∂v∂n¬ NHm˚H R∂hrπ K∂Vhjs!H NHm H M L i∂ChjßH NHm H R∂h®N K∂v∂n˜H NHm H M |˚hdπHM |∆h®MH M |∆h hß Dˆ Ò n∂ G… R∂h®N‘higƒh® ˝mf® M G¬h;©H Nvr©H Dˆ ]∂Nvf©H ]d©hl;©H ]rd®n©h† *v“M Fspƒ L ik¬ G… Nv® M K∂v∂n˜H NHv®H Dˆ R∂h®n©H *cˆ M

’.*VhjßH !H G¬h;©H v∂n˜H §† Sd© :©c… ... Nvr©H ]gd©




56. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:30. The term perfecting saint is not unusu-

al. Simnån• describes the perfecting (mukammil) saint as superior to the simply k å mil.

Isfaråyin•, Le Révélateur des mystères 119 fn. 188. Al-Qåshån• puts the level of perfec-

tion (takm• l) above that of walå ya. Al-Qåshån•, A Glossary of Technical Terms s.v.

“safar ” (p. 87, Arabic text).

57. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:59. The hadith is from Bukhår•, Ía˙•˙,

Jihåd 16.

58. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 105b. See also al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t

al-kubr å 2:57. Elsewhere we are told, “The doctors of Law are the sources of authority

(]dƒnƒn©H ‰NhÉa¬) for the inhabitants of Hell, the sufis are the sources of authority for the doc-

tors of Law, the People of esoteric tasting (dhawq) are the sources for the sufis, and the

highest are Speakers of verification.” Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 25b.


60. This is the name most often given to the mysterious figure Moses and his ser-

vant meet in the desert (Q. 18:60–82). Kha∂ir, who has received “knowlege from God’s

Presence,” agrees to guide Moses on condition that he not challenge what he sees Kha∂ir

do. The prophet agrees, but after he sees Kha∂ir commit what appear to be violent or

inappropriate deeds, he loses his patience. The guide then explains the hidden reasons

he had been commanded by God to act in such shocking ways. The story is popular

among sufi thinkers because it affirms esoteric knowledge. It will be seen below that this

story is central to >Al• Waf å’s teaching on relationship between sanctity and prophecy.

61. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 28b, 29a.

@† |ƒmfp¬ VHN! Fp˜H VHN˘ ]rƒhx¬ hiuƒHm∆ K¬ M L dzuj©H M ]fp˜H :©C R∂n≈ M |¨mfjé Rrpj∂ H Uƒhj©H ˝hl… ! ...‘! H &mfj˜H ]l;π §qjr∆ vr† Hn…C |k¬ |© £vp∂ L © hl¨ |¨mfj¬ ˝hß HCH Uƒhj©H h† hq∂H M Gu† ! M ˝mrƒ |rfs∂

Vm H ht∑ |dg Nv;j† Uƒhj©H HNm´ K¬ K¬n∂ @† |f[∂ L © H M ]l;üH ]t©hoé Nnq©H Gwπ |ƒh“H h† :©C K¨ Uƒhj©H Fd[∂’|¨mfj¬ K¬ ]g∑m©H R∂n≈ |k¨ Uxr∆ M

62. Speaking of this relationship, the poet R¥m• (d. 672/1273) says, “As for the boy

whose throat was cut by Kha∂ir, the vulgar do not comprehend the mystery thereof.”

’Rgø ÒhÉ vƒhÉd˚ NV Hn˚Ó nÉß * Rgπ v∂nÉfƒ nÉqÉø A… HNnÉs™ Ó‘ The Mathnaw• of Jalå lu’dd • n R¥m• R. A.

Nicholson ed. and trans. (London: Luzac, 1926) I:16 (Persian text) and 2:16 (translation).

63. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 2b. (A longer passage containingthese lines was mentioned above.)




|dg¨ nqÿH ]d∑mwø K¬ ]∂!m©H npƒ M |∆mf˚ K¬ ]©hßn©H npƒ Kdƒ *hjt© Ul[d© *hjtƒ nqÿH Ò@s©H |dg¨ §ßm¬ §r© hé˘‘Sla©H L ;π U¬ L [k©H L ;p… |ju∂nå |¬bg∆ Îc©H mßn©H L ;π U¬ D©m©H L ;π H :©C §† ns©H M Ò@s©H

In >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 51a, the passage runs differently:

H :©C D† ns©H M *nqø ]d∑mwø K¬ ]©hßN npƒ M |∆mf˚ K¬ ]©hßn©H npƒ Kdƒ *hjt© Ulpd© *hjtƒ nqÿH §ßm¬ §r© há˘‘

’Sla©H L ;π U¬ L [k©H L ;p… |ju∂nå |¬bg∆ Îc©H ˝mßn©H L ;π U¬ D©m©H L ;π“Moses met al-Kha∂ir with his attendant, in order to unite for this attendant the sea of

mission from his prophethood, and the sea of a mission from the particular quality of his

al-Kha∂ir. The secret in this is that the rule that obtains between a saint and a messen-

ger, which is necessarily linked to his (the latter’s) sharia, is like the rule that obtains

between a star and the sun.” According to this reading, and assuming there is no mistake

in this manuscript, the use of “mission” here should be understood in its wider sense,

beyond the “mission” of the law-bearing ras¥l.





hl… :©C M Sla©H L ;π D† hig… Ò m[k©H Òh;πH J“Nv˚H Sla©H ÔniΩ HChÉ† |l;pƒ F… m… G… niΩ Sla©H Jƒh¥ HCH‘

D©H vij[¬ G… U“N Wk©H Ïh¥ HCH M Wk©H L ;π L ;üH h… M |jë hig… ÔHVhij“!H Òh;πH J“Nv˚H v“M HCH Wk©H HH M |∆hf´! Jf´ |jf´H H Ò@s©H |dg¨ |l;π D† ”Nvk¬ L gß M |dg¨ §g∑ |g©H mßN hdπ D† vij[¬ L ;π H hl;† |l;π’Dtj˚H *ht˚

Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:25, adds to the end of this passage, ’˝mßN U¬ §©M L ;π:©v…‘ “So the rule of a saint is in accord with a messenger.” (This addition, or something

like it, is required by syntax.)


Ïh[[ƒ |j©hßN Slå ÔNHm∆ M |∆h†M J˚V hlg† |l;π D† L ;üH Kd“Nvk¬ §ß m¬ hdπ D† G∂HnßH Dkƒ hd©MH h…‘K…B D† Nizjß ]∂!m©H GˆH Òh;“H H L g¨ nqÿH |ƒ vw® Îc©H *hj† Mˆ ]tdgÿH :©C h… M *vuƒ |tgojdß Îc©H |jtdgø

’|j†@ø K¬B D† niΩ HCH L i© |jg¬hu¬ m;∂ Td… *HNh† §jt©H :©CElsewhere this point is put succinctly as follows: “The quality of the saint is the inward

dimension of prophecy.” ’mfk©H K≈hƒ §©m©H L ;π‘ >Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rab-bå niyya 79a.


*n;˚H L ˆ n¬H K¬ /§å Nh;ƒH &na©H §qj®H H M hk≈hƒ hd©M@© L gs∂ H |lgu† ... ]∂!M©H M ]©hßn©H fln¬H Kdƒ |© Ul“ M‘’L i¬hr¬ D† Sd© K¬ L i¬h;πhƒ |faj∂ ! D… Ò@ujß!H ]iπ §g¨ HnˆhΩ

70. Idr•s and Jesus are also located in the heavenly spheres. For references and dis-

cussion see M. Chodkiewicz, Seal of the Saints 93. On the wider issue of the develop-

ment and understanding of the story of al-Kha∂ir, see Encyclopedia of Islam (second

ed.) s.v. “al-Kha∂ir,” >Ammår’s Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå hdil• 1:208 ff and Geoffroy, Lesoufisme en Éypte 423–26.

71 >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 54a. Ilyås and Gabriel are associated

with jalå l; Kha∂ir and Michael are associated with jamå l. See also Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:26.



’|st˚ m® K¬ |sü nˆhz† |∆mf˚ ∏MN Geú mˆ G∂nf“ Nm∑ Df˚ G;© hl… |j∂!M ∏MN Geú mˆ nqø D©M G;© ...‘In the school of Ibn >Arab•, >Abd al-Razzåq al-Qåshån• described the Kha∂ir-Moses rela-

tionship in much the same way. In his Shar fuß¥ß al-˙ikam (third ed.) (Cairo: al-Óalab•,1987) 315–16, he says, “al-Kha∂ir is the esoteric form of the Name of God. His station

is that of the spirit. To him are sanctity, the unseen, and the secrets of destiny . . . As for

Moses, he is the exoteric form of the Name of God. His station is that of the heart. To

him are the sciences of mission, prophecy and law.” On this issue >Al• Waf å’ belongs

much more in the Akbarian camp than among the Shådhilites. Ibn >A†å’Allåh considers

erroneous the opinion that “for each time ( zaman) there is a Kha∂ir, and one man attains

the spiritual level of the Kha∂iriyya in each time.” La†å ’if al-minan 98.

74. Q. 33:72 reads, “We [God] offered the Trust to the heavens, the earth and the

mountains, but they refused to bear it, being afraid. Yet, humanity bore it.” The detailsof this trust are left to the imagination, but it would be reasonable to assume, as does the

Tafs• r al-Jalå layn, that this trust is a contract between God and humanity, setting out the

terms of transgression/punishment and piety/reward (cf. 33:73). Ibn >Arab• ties the abil-

ity to bear the Trust to humanity’s essential abilities. “God created Adam upon His own

Form . . . Through the strength of the Form he was able to carry the offered Trust.”

Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge 276.





Nh´H K¬ |˚H |ƒ Geú flc©H *nˆhΩ K¨ nf¨ :©cg† Vhds©H ∏MN K¬ ]∂mßm˜H ]˚h¬!H D† Kxƒ h¬ Geú mˆ nqÿH H L g¨H‘

’...]∂vku©H ]¬πn©H M D˚vg©H DulöH D∆Hc©H ns©H Vhf¨ K¬ vf¨ |˚H M *hj† M §ßm¬76. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 17b.

§g¨ Hv∆NhÉ† h∂mß Hnaƒ L ∂n˜ |gßNH flc©H |πMnƒ Geú hl… *hj† M §ßm˜ nqÿH Hciƒ §g[j˜H vdlüH Dky©H RüH ˝hr†‘’...h˚Vhf¨ K¬ Hvf¨ Hv“m† h∂mß Hnaƒ D˚hleöH (read: hlispƒ) hispƒ *h…NVH §jπ |d† hi© Geú Îc©H |geljƒ hlˆNh´H

On the Spirit appearing to Mary, in human form, to announce the arrival of Jesus, see

Q. 19:17.


78. Elsewhere the shift, from Kha∂ir as nonresponsible actor to the authoritative

divine Spirit, is echoed by an innovative reading of “I did not do it of my own accord”

(Q. 18:82). We are told: “Kha∂ir said, ‘That which I did of my own accord.’The må here

is a relative pronoun, and thus it was by his own will because those actions were by the

quality of the spirit of saintly inspiration.” >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 52b.

’Î!m©H Òhi©!H ∏MN Òh;πH K¬ J˚h… ˝hu†!H :g∆ ! |˚hå *n¬H M ]©m∑m¬ hkˆ hˆh¬ M În¬H K¨ |jgu† h¬ nqÿH ˝h®‘This is significant in that it is describing in shorthand the authority for Kha∂ir’s acts.

In the above discussion Kha∂ir’s authority is, as we shall see, the Spirit of divine Self-

disclosure. In this exegesis that authority is called simply “saintly inspiration,” accord-

ingly named by its function and not in light of its essence, which is elsewhere described

as the Spirit of Dominion. Cf. Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 18b: Ahl al-Qur’å n (the

“unifiers”) read it as a relative pronoun; and the ahl al-furqå n (the “separators”) read it

as a particle of negation.


U∂hÉ®m©H :g∆ |© ˝MhÉ† ]˚h¬!H ]f˚n¬ §† mˆ CH Vhds©H L ;π K¬ Hnf∑ |dg Uxjs∆ L © h¬ G∂Mhjƒ *hf© |kdƒ M |kdƒ HB hlg†‘|©mrƒ Îns©H *hfø K¬ |© niΩ §jπ h˚VNH M hkdao† ˝mr∂ L ´ J®nø M ÔVNH |©mrƒ U®Hnf©H Vhds©H |“M K¨ Ta;∂ ˝HB ! M|gu† h¬ Gu“ D† |© ∏! CH *nføH L ´ În¬H K¨ |jgu† h¬ M :ƒN K¬ ]lπN hlˆbk… h“nojs∂ M hlˆvåH hygf∂ H:ƒN VHNh†

’Hnf∑ Gf[g© §g[∆ CH |dg¨ Uxjs∆ ! h¬ G∂Mh∆ mˆ via˜H Hcˆ H Hni“ *nd¥ n¬H K¨ ! *n¬H K¨ HNVh∑80. For Moses and the Self-disclosure on the mountain see Q. 7:143.

81. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 18b. The last line of Qur’an quota-

tion is in response to Mary’s protest that she cannot have a child since no man has yet

touched her.h… M ... ˝mßN h˚H háH |geú L ;pƒ ˝h® M h∂mß Hnaƒ L ∂n˜ ]∂msdu©H ]˚h¬!H D† ]k≈hf©H Vhds©H ∏MN Geú Hc;ˆ M‘

’êˆ §g¨ mˆ :ƒN Gh® :©c… |©Mrƒ M;˜H |“M Ïh[π hik¨ Ta… h˜ hdqr¬ Hn¬H82. For sources of this hadith see Isfaråyin•, Le Révélateur des mystères 191 fn. 2.


M Tuq©H M mr©H D† *Nmi≈ Nv® §g¨ |j®M D† L ˆNmiΩ m;∂ M |∂hlßH vuƒ hlßH nˆhz¬ J®M Fπh∑ G… U¬ Hc;ˆ M‘*NmiΩ h… M Ò m[j©h… Dƒhp∑H ˝mrƒ Îv¬p˜H RüH NhåH v® M HMm® Tuœ hlg… M L ˆNmiΩ Tuœ mˆ *NmiΩ Îm® hlg… hd©M!H L ∆hø K¬B D† M Nvf©H U¬ hˆNmiΩ |u¬ L ˆNmiΩ K;© F…Hm;©H Vvuƒ *Mh†n¨ M *Mhfr˚ h;† nlr©H Nmiz… cd¬m∂

’...÷sla©H U¬ F…Hm;©H Nmiz… |u¬ L ˆNmiz† Sla©h… *n¬H NmiΩ K;© hd©M hig… ]k¬B!H hd©MH Vvuƒ m;∂

84. The last line of the quoted passage implies that this “sun” will be someoneother than the Seal. However, in light of other discussions of the Apocalypse (taken up

below), this “sun” should probably be understood to be the Seal himself.


’... hliƒ ]∑hÿH hlif∆Hn¬ Edπ K¬ hli© Gƒhr¬ @† hd©M!H L ∆hø M hdf˚!H L ∆hø h¬H M‘86 This is in contrast to the Sh•>• doctrine of taqiyya (dissimulation) and the idea of

hatred for the enemies of the Imams, which sees no break in the series of unbelieving




opponents. On these concepts see Amir-Moezzi, Divine Guide 26, 88, 128, and al-Taba†abå’•, Shi> ite Islam 223 ff. On opponents in the Sufi milieu, see >Ayn al-Qu∂åt al-

Óamadån•, Tamh• d å t (Tehran: University of Tehran, 1962) 187, and H. Landolt, “LeParadoxe de la “Face de Dieu”: ‘Azîz-e Nasafî (VIIe/XIIIe siècle) et le “MonismeÉsotérique” 186.

87. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 98a.Dˆ!!H ÚVm“M ha∂ H :fg® §g¨ L jo∂ |g©H ha∂ H K;l˜H |udls© F“Hm©H |ldg;ƒ Îvlp˜H |r≈h˚ D† êf˜H RüH ˝h®‘

n∂HV D† |®n† h® ]dldπN D† hdf˚!H L joƒ L ∂hr©H :fg® §g¨ |ul“ ]d˚hlπnƒ flmjs˜H hd©M!H L jø L ;pƒ hkduj¬ niz∂’Df˚ Fg® §g¨ D©M G… Euƒ

88. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 98a.K¬ GΩ D† |˚M†nu∂ Edπ K¬ L i© niz∂ ÎH |g©H L id∆h∂ H !H hkd¨ |g©H |˚H m†nu∂ Edπ K¬ |g©H §©H ÎH Mnzk∂ Gˆ‘

Dˆ ];∂@˜H M[(

?)|gˆH K¬ K¬ m˜H Ò@s©H ˝mfrƒ ]©mfr˜H

]|∆h˚hdƒ ][pƒ L ∂hr©H Di©!H L jÿH Fπh∑ |˚m… Dˆ Òhly©H’D≈hÉÉπ!H ÎhÉÉ†m©H LjÿH Hvˆ D† NmÉ¬!H U“n∆ |g©H §©H (?) §iÉj˚H ÎH nÉ¬!H Dœ® M ]dld;üH ]d˚hƒn©H |¬h;πH Nm∑

Note the title, the “encompassing Waf å’• Seal.”89. Hadith from Tirmidh•’s Sa˙•˙, Manåqib, 20.90. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 9b.91. Hadith from al-Niså’•, Sunan, I˙bås, 4.92. This tradition is preserved in the Sh•>• hadith collection Bi˙å r al-anwå r (106

vols) (Beirut: 1983) compiled by Mu˙ammad Båqir al-Majlis• (d. 1699 or 1700). Theexact wording seems to be a conflation of two similar hadiths:

’Dg¨ Mı h˚ı !˘ Dk¨ ÎVµ∂ ! |˚ı !˘ !‘and

’Dk¬ G“N Mı hƒı !˘ Dk¨ Ygf∂ !‘35:275. For the numerous

instances and versions of this hadith see A Concordance of the Be˙å r al-anwå r 4:2746,2747.

93. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 11b.v∂ *cˆ ˝h® M ]ín;©H *vdƒ Hmœ n©H ]udƒ hle¨ K¨ U∂hƒ M nwf©H nl¨ M Uls©H ]©bké §k¬ n;ƒ mƒH flvlp˜H nfÿH D† h“‘˝h† :©cg† R≈hk©hƒ F∆Hn˜H ÷wøH hsg©H M |˚hs© Dgu† Dg¨ M h˚H !H Dk¨ Yfg∂ ! ˝h® M vd©H ]©bké |k¬ hleu† hle¨

’ÏCh… !H Îvuƒ hi©mr∂ ! |dg¨ ‰Vhw©H Îvlp˜HRpg© §ku∂ nf…!H R∂vw©H h˚H Dg¨The last statement from >Al• is also found in Bi˙å r al-anwå r , in a number of versions,most of which appear in a context illustrating >Al•’s precedence in Islam over Ab¥ Bakr.See Bi˙å r al-anwå r 38:268, 239, 254. For references to a number of variations see A

Concordance of the Be˙å r al-anwå r 16:11844, 11845. We saw earlier, in ch. 3 >Al•Waf å’ claiming himself to be the “tongue” of the Prophet.

94. At the same time, it must be noted that >Al• Waf å’ states clearly that Ab¥ Bakris to be considered as one of the elite of the Muslim community. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 11b.

95. In the Qur’anic story of Jesus (4:157, 158), his crucifixion is denied: “Theydid not kill or crucify him; it only appeared to them so . . . Rather, God raised him up toHimself. God is Powerful and Wise.”

96. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:43.0Ò@s©H |dg¨ §sd¨ ˝bk∂ hl… ˝bkdß M Ò@s©H |dg¨ §sd¨ U†N hl… U†N |k¨ |g©H §œN F©h≈ Dƒı Kƒ Dg¨ ˘ ˝mr∂ h… M‘

§g¨ hπM© ]kdts©H K¬ §rƒı Ò@s©H |dg¨ hπm˚ ˘ ˝mr∂ |juls† |k¨ |g©H §œN ÷∑HmÿH Dg¨ flvdß ˝h® :©cƒ M :Jg®Dƒı Kƒ §g¨ U†N §jπ Nvr©H ]˚hd∑ §† hΩmtp¬ ˝b∂ Ò g† /hls©H §©˘ |dg¨ U†n∂ k¨ |g©H §œN F©h≈ Dƒı Kƒ Dg¨ L ßH

’:©cƒ L g¨ı |g©h† F©h≈>Al• al-Khawwås was Sha>rån•’s teacher; see F. Meier, “The Priority of Faith andThinking Well of Others over a Concern for Truth among Muslims” in his Essays on

Islamic Piety and Mysticism.




97. We saw in chapter 1 above that Óaydar Åmul•, from a Sh•>• perspective, iden-

tified this final Seal as >Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib; this against Ibn >Arab•’s identification of Jesus,

from a generally Sunn• perspective.98. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 12a. ’hli©he¬H Dg¨ M §sd¨ K¬ nzj∆ Dj©H ]u“n©H Dˆ :g∆ M...‘99. The only explanation that comes to mind for this term is the “appearing” of

the Holy Spirit to Mary: “We sent to her Our Spirit, and he appeared before her ( fa-

tamaththala la-hå ) as a man in all respects” (Q. 19:17).


K¨ ! hd©MH hkdr∂ Îc©H L ;üH mˆ Rdrpj©H M nfø MH nxk© R†Hm˜H L ;üH D† Glujs∂ h¬ ne…H M L ;üHm mˆ R∂vwj©H‘L ∆hø ˝h® háH Epƒ ! M Vh¨ ‰Nhø §©H ”hdjπH nd¥ K¬ nl¨ M n;ƒ DƒH híh… Ôhdkˆv©H ! M Ôhßmsp˜H D† nx˚ ˝hl¨HD† h¬ M ÔHmls©H §† h¬ |© §©Hu∆ RüH ˝m® nl¨ Ulß M |ƒ n®h† :©Hcƒ Kdrd©H v“m† |g©H ˝mßN D˚H n;ƒ Dƒ! Kddfk©H

R∂vwj©H !(read

§¬hi©!H)

D©!H Rdrpj©H R∂vw∆ mi† |ƒ n®h† hkdr∂ :©C v“m† Îne©H Jë h… M hlikdƒ h¬ M ÷œN!H&hf∆! !H hd©M!H K¬ vπH &hf∆! m;∂ ! Hc;ˆ M Kddfk©H L ∆hø ]∑hÿ !H hdf˚!H &hf∆H K¬ vπ! K;∂ L © Hc M D©!vjß!Hhdf˚!H Ïhp∑H M Rdrpjg© hdf˚!H L ∆hø Ïhp∑h† ]∑hø Fh® §g¨ |j∑hø M hdf˚!H L ∆hø Fg® §g¨ |˚! hd©M!H L ∆høDg¨ h∂ ]∂hlufß M Kdus∆ M ]slø Òh¨ D† D© Gd® M ... Rdrpjg© hd©M!H L ∆hø Ïhp∑H M R∂vwjg© L ig… Kd¬Mjo˜H

’L g¨H M §© H |g©H M Rdrpjg© J H :ƒhp∑H M R∂vwjg© L ig… hd©M!H Ïhp∑HFor another brief discussion of R∂vw∆ and Rdrë see fol. 101b. See also Wensinck, Con-

cordance 3:276 regarding taßd • q.

101. This phrase is the classical theological and philosophical definition of mira-

cle. Although not mentioned by name, the kind of miracle being alluded to here is the

mu> jiza, which is theologically distinguished from a saint’s miracle (kar å ma), as proof

of the authenticity of a prophet or messenger. See L. Gadet and M.-M. Anawati,

Introduction à la théologie musulmane (second ed.) (Paris: Vrin, 1970) 186, 359.


D† mˆ Sd© M |j¬h¬H §¬m¬h¬ M |j;gó Vmk“ K¬ hd©M!H Udl“ M D©Cha©h† L z¨!H L jÿH Fπh∑ h˚VhjßH ]rdrüH D† M‘K¬ @… H hl;† |©hl… £NHM M Kddfk©H L ∆hø nß |˚! n∂HMv©H n∂hß D† |dg¨ L ;p∂ ! M L ;p∂ h˚VhjßH ! L ;π ÎC n¬B

’... Ò m¬h¬ M Uƒh∆ L iúhÿ hd©M!H K¬ G… :©Hc… ... Ò m¬h¬ M Uƒh∆ L iúhÿ hdf˚!HSha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:31, infers from the phrase “Master of the Greatest Seal”

a doctrine of a Seal for every age.


˝hut©H Gru©H hlß hi˚H ]tß@t©H ˝mr∆ Dj©H nlr©H hlß D©M!H hls©H D† ÒVÓ v“M |˚H Îvlp˜H flnß!H E∂vπ D† h“‘K¬ Ò bu©H D©MH K¬ (read: HvπHM) vπHM hlß G… D† v“M |˚H n…C M Vhst©H M M;©H L ©h¨ D† ]∂Vh˜H NMw©H ÷œhd†

M §ßm¬ M L dˆHnƒH M ÒVÓ v“M |˚H n…c† §sd¨ M hldgß M VMHV M §ßm¬ M L dˆHnƒH M ∏m˚ M ÒVÓ L ˆ M ]ufs©H Gßn©HMNhˆ hldgs© M Tßm∂ VMHv© n… C M |∂v∂ Kdƒ D∆!H |gdt… |˚! ∏mk© S∂NVH n…c† L i∂@t… hlßH M Li˚hd hƒ §sd¨

’L i˚Hv“M Ta… :©C H !H Hc… h;¬ D† h˚@† Ôv“M |©mrƒ NhåH104. Mu˙ammad Waf å’, Naf å ’is al-> irf å n al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya 71a. The order

of prophets as found in the tradition of the Prophet’s Ascension runs: Adam (in the first

heaven), Jesus, Joseph, Idr•s, Aaron, Moses, and Abraham (in the seventh heaven).

Bukhår•, Sa˙•˙ Salåt 1. More generally on the subject, see the articles in Le voyage ini-

tiatique en terre d’islam. The sequence of prophets used by the Waf å’s in fact followsclosely that adopted by al-Simnån• (d. 737/1336). There, as part of his theory of the

Seven Subtle Organs (la†• fa, pl. la†å ’if ), seven prophets are identified, one associated at

each level with a color and a la†• fa. In ascending order, they are Adam, Noah, Abraham,

Moses, David, Jesus, and Mu˙ammad. See H. Corbin, The Man of Light in Iranian Sufism

124. Corbin, En Islam Iranien 3:278; and Elias, The Throne Carrier of God ch. 5.





106. Elias, The Throne Carrier of God 72, notes that “A†las” is associated with the

first sphere or God’s Footstool; yet in our passage here it is at the level of the Throne.


h¬ G;ƒ h[† Dßn;©H :g† F… m;˜H K¬he©H :gt©H K¨ Vhtjs˜H ÔHVHvujß!H Fßh˚ hé ÔHmfk©H L jø D† vlp¬ h“ M‘Sg≈!H Ußhj©H :gt©H K¨ Vhtjs˜H ÔHVHvujß!H Fßhk∂ hé hd©M!H L jø D† h“ hl… |jd∑hø Vh∂B M |¬vr∆ K¬ |ƒ h“(sic) :©Hcg† Ôh…npj˜H Ú@†H Òh;πH Fßh˚ hé Hm∆H :d©MH M JƒHme©H :g† L ;ü Jßhk¬ L ;pƒ D∆H |˚! M Anu©H :g†

’... |ju∂nå |gfr∆ L © M Osk© L iu∂Hnå Jgf®Another passage, making much the same point, is found on fol. 89b of the Waßå yå .


Rdrpj©H /§xf¬ Ôh∂!m©H P∆h† ÔHmfk©H L ∆hø vlp¬ h[† K¬he©H :gt©H L ;π K≈hƒ Ò B@¬ Ußhj©H :gt©H L ;π h… h˜ M‘’]k¬B!H nŸhß hdf˚h… |j¬H hlg¨ h;† hig… ]¬vrj˜H k¬B!H |dg¨ Ômjπ h¬ §g¨ Îmjp¬ |˚h¬B h… M Jƒhe©H

The last sentence is a paraphrase of a popular hadith not found in the major hadith

collections.

109. This was the last pilgrimage taken up by the Prophet. During his return to

Medina, stopping at Ghad•r Khumm, Mu˙ammad proclaimed, “For whomsoever I am

lord, then >Al• is also lord.” This hadith is central to the Sh•>• understanding of religious

authority. See Wensinck, Concordance 8:316, 8:325, 4:281; Momen, Shi>• Islam 15; and

W. Madelung, The Succession to Mu˙ammad (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1997) 253. >Al• Waf å’ mentions this event elsewhere, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 6a,

as will be discussed below.


G;© H L i†H L ik∂V (K∂v©H Hci© in margin) ]¬!H *ci© Vv[∂ HvπHM ]kß ]∂h¬ G… ÍHN §g¨ |g©H Euf∂ ˝h® v® M‘L i˚H M Ò bu©H D©MH HBMH D† Ïhx®!H H (sic) :©Hcƒ Lg¨ M |˚hÉ¬B GˆH VHvujß! Fßhk¬ L ;pƒ ˝bkj∂ Fx® Òh¨ ]∂h¬Ò m∂ |ddi© NHvjßH v® Ò md©H h¬b©H H &HVm©H ][π Ò m∂ D† |©bk∂ ÒVÓ (read: HBMH) HBM D† L i©MH H §© |f˚ M L ij´NMK¬h´ §©H ]∂h¬ vuƒ Hc;ˆ M ... ∏m˚ Fg® §g¨ (?) cd¬m∂ K¬ ]d˚he©H ]∂h˜H Fπh∑ §©H NhåH M ÷œN!H M ÔHmls©H |g©H Rg“L z¨!H R≈hk©H ˝bk∆ M Uƒhs©H K¬b©H Fx® D©Cha©H KsüH mƒH Chjß!Hh… M ... hd©M!H L ∆hø Îvlp˜H Fxr©H m;∂ ]∂h¬

’K¬he©H K¬b©H D† Ôh∂!m©H L joƒ Îh†m©HIn “The ‘Cyclical Reform’: A Study of the Mujaddid Tradition,” Landau-Tasseron notes

that the end of the eighth century in Egypt was ripe with eschatological speculation, but

contrary to the Waf å’s, the Renewer tradition was not part of these speculations. On thecontrary, it had no direct association with millenial or centenary dramas—here or in any

earlier period (p. 81). It is interesting that at least one writer, Zayn al-D •n al->Iråq• (d.

806/1404), had even argued that the Renewer, whose mission it was to halt the moral and

religious decline of his age, would in fact delay the advent of Dajjål and the Mahd• (p. 80).

111.Usually the Renewers at the turn of each century are not called “poles.” Al-

Shådhil• is cited here as one pole/Renewer, but much debate had been taking place in

this period over the identities of the Renewers. A typical list, though never unanimously

agreed upon, was, up to the ninth century: (1) >Umar II (d. 101/719); (2) al-Shåfi>• (d.

204/820); (3) al-Ash>ar• (d. 324/935); (4) al-Båqillån• (d. 403/1013) or al-Isfarå’in• (d.406/1015); (5) al-Ghazål• (d. 505/1111); (6) Fakhr al-D•n al-Råz• (d. 606/1210); (7) Ibn

Daq•q al->°d (d. 702/1302); (8) Zayn al-D•n al->Iråq• (d. 806/1404); (9) al-Suy¥†• (d.

911/1505) or Qå∂• Zakariyå (d. 925/1519). Landau-Tasseron, “The ‘Cyclical Reform’:

A Study of the Mujaddid Tradition” 84. It is important to note that here these

Renewer/poles are the inheritors of certain prophets. This is structurally similar to the

Sh•>• doctrine, which holds that the prophets Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and




Mu˙ammad each had an esoteric representative: Seth, Shem, Isaac, Aaron, Simon Peter,

and >Al•, respectively. See H. Halm, Shiism 168.

112. >Al• Waf å’ would not be the only person to have claimed the honorific

“Renewer.” Landau-Tasseron, “The ‘Cyclical Reform’: A Study of the Mujaddid

Tradition” 86, 87 notes that both al-Suy¥†• and al-Ghazål•, without waiting for history to

decide, bestowed the title upon themselves. The idea of a “sufi-Renewer” apparently

caught on; Ma˙m¥d Ab¥ al->Ilyån al-Shådhil• (d. 1326/1908) was known as “mujaddid

al-† asawwuf.” J. Johansen, Sufism and Islamic Reform in Egypt 54.


Fg® §g¨ §©M G… |g©H Euf∂ E∂vüH D† h“ M Fxr©H mˆ G“n©H Hci† ... ]kß |∂h… G… ÍHN §g¨ |g©H Euf∂ |˚H h“ M‘L ∆hø Fg® §g¨ L iúhø L ik¬h´ M hd©M!H Ïhx®h† L ik¬h´ L iúhø vlp¬ M ]ufß L ˆ M hdf˚!H Ïhx®H Ò bu©H m©MH M Df˚

’Kddfk©HIn his Waßå yå (fol. 95a) >Al• Waf å’ tells us that the greatest seal is upon the Mu˙am-

madan heart.

114. Although >Al• Waf å’ uses “pole” to designate an individual, on at least one

occasion he uses it in a much wider sense. In Waßå yå 13a, he describes the “Pole of

poles” as the Universal Efficient, which is present in all forms of creation as poles.

G;© Gƒ Fx® Ôhk∂h;©H M Ôhd˚hleöH G;© M Fx® ÷œHn¨!H K¬ &m˚ G;© M Fx® Òhr¬ G;© M Fx® ˝hπ G;g† ...‘ M |…NHv¬ M |πNHm“ M |fgr© |ƒ ÷∑hÿH |˚m… L ©Hm¨ Fx® R≈h˚ G… M Fx® Tk∑ K¬ ]t∂h≈ G;© M Gƒ Fx® Tk∑

’0Dg;©H ˝hut©H mˆ vπHM J®M G… D† Ïhx®!H Fx® M ... |st˚115. This is an allusion to the Farewell pilgrimage described earlier.


|∆h†M Gf® mˆ M h¬b©H NHvjßH Ò m∂ K¬ hij∂Hvƒ ]jß |∂h˜H *vˆ M h¬m∂ mjß M ]∂hleg´ Ïhsπ K¬ ]kß ]∂h¬ L ik¬ G;© M‘ M Us∆ ]jß nø!H UdƒN UƒHN ]ulöH n;ƒ D† ˇnπ!H *cˆ ]ƒhj… Kdπ ‡H Kp˚ M niåH £@eƒ Lgß M |dg¨ |g©H §g∑ niz∂ |d† hi∆h¬@¨ M ]¨hs©H Ôh∂H n® mˆ M Ußhj©H GøV K¬he©H K¬b©H Hvˆ §qr˚H HCH ... n[i©H K¬ ]ªhlufß M Kdus∆K¬ ‰Vgw©H L ˆv M h¬ Íhk©H §∆h∂ M hiƒny¬ K¬ Íla©H Ugx∆ M L ∂n¬ KƒH §sd niz∂ M h“v©H ”no∂ M Òhj©H Nmiz©H flvi˜H§∆h∂ M NMv©H Hcˆ Dqrj∂ |ƒ M L ∂n¬ KƒH §sd¨ n® ]d˚he©H M flvlp˜H n® §©M!H ]∂h˜H hj∂h¬ :©C E;ú M Mnxk∂ Edπ

’... Nm¬H |d† Rrpj∂ v∂v“ NMVElsewhere >Al• Waf å’ notes that the sun will rise in the west only as an unveiling of the

Seal of sainthood. See his Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 44a.

117. On the various understandings of the Mahd•, the return of Jesus, and theDajjål see the relevant articles in Encyclopedia of Islam (second ed.) and s.v. “Mi>rå j”.

118. Al• Waf å’, Kit å b al-maså mi> al-rabbå niyya 62b.

119. For a discussion of the far more elaborate (and not tajd • d -based) time cycles

in Ismå>•lism, see H. Corbin, Temps cyclique et gnose ismaélienne (Paris: Berg

International, 1982) ch. 2. Also, >Al• Waf å’s earlier use of the “great completing speak-

er” recalls the Ismå>•l• idea of the prophecy of each cycle (dawr ) containing that of the

earlier cycles. See, for example, Ab¥ Ya>q¥b al-Sijistån•, Kashf al-Ma j¥b (Paris: 1949)

69–70, 76–77.

120. Usually, the “>°d prayer” occurs just before sunrise on >°d al-Fi†r (1 Shawwål),and >°d al-A∂˙å (10 Dh¥ al-Óijja). Historical sources note this major earthquake

occurred on Thursday 23 Dh¥ al-Óijja. M. Taher, Corpus des textes arabes relatifs aux

tremblements de terre et autres catastrophes naturelles de la conquête arabe au XII H.

/ XVIII J.C. Doctoral thesis, Paris 1, 1979, pp. 176–88.


! ]∂vπ!H ]∂!m©H n∂HV L joƒ ˝bkj˜H Îvlp˜H Îvπ!H Vm“m©H ÏN ]lg… hˆ@¨H M hˆnf…H M Ôhlg;©H L z¨H H Lg¨h†‘




E©h´ SdlÿH Ò m∂ npß D† hd˚hd… hdπM Îv©m˜H Uœm©hƒ ŒN!H §©H JdπMH h˜ Dj©H ]∂m†m©H ]lg;©H Dˆ M hˆhku¬ Hcˆhl… Ò md©H :©C D† vdu©H @∑ J®M Ge¬ vk¨ hig… ŒN!H J©b©b∆ ]∂vlp˜H n[i©H K¬ ]∂hlufß M Kdk´H Òh¨ ][üH ÎC

Twk… higu“ M []u¬höH (?) Chy©H ]∂!H ÔHC] naf˜H G¬h;©H vds©H hˆhls∂ Dj©H Nms©H D† (sic) :©Hcƒ RüH hf˚H’...h\¬hljƒ Nms©H hi©Hb©B ŒN!H J©b©B HCH ˝hr† Îmfk©H Jdf©H ]kfgƒ |st˚ Ge¬ hl… Hnr©H122. Our hagiographical and historical sources do not provide us with Mu˙ammad

Waf å’s birthdate.123. We saw earlier, near the end of the section “The Teacher and Oneness” anoth-

er use of “Perfect Sayyid” referring to the Prophet. However, this term is not fixed, sincein Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 21b, the reader is told that he may become the PerfectSayyid if he sees past the various existences to the single reality of existence. PerfectSayyid was also mentioned in the first section of this chapter, where >Al• Waf å’ attrib-utes it to he who can see both the Oneness of Reality and the plurality of creation at thesame time. These Perfect Sayyids would be perfect imitations of the Prophet.

124. Ibn >Arab•, Fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 63, Chodkiewicz, Seal of Saints 128. This is anelaboration of the hadith report in which the Prophet describes himself as the last brickin the wall of prophethood; see Bukhår•, Sa˙•˙, Manåqib 18.

125. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 95b.:g∆ L dzu©H Ónr©H Nmß M D he˜H Ufs©H Vv¨ Nmiz©H Hcˆ ÒHm¨H v¬ M h“ HCH |g©H G“H mˆ Ív®!H Nmiz©H Hcˆ K¬b†‘hé :©C vuƒ |g©H D∆h∂ L ´ Òh¨ ]∂húhl´ M Mna¨ M ]´@´ Òhú vk¨ ]∂hlufß M Kdk´H Òh¨ Òhú K¬ h¬h¨ Mna¨ M vπHM ]∂h¬

’0L dg¨ UßHM |g©H M ha∂126. Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:52, quoted from Waßå yå 75b.

K¬ ∏HMN#H nak© Úh˚njøH h˚˘ §g¨ h∂ |∆Nm∑ h¬ ]ªhlufß M Kdus∆ Us∆ Òh¨ h¬hi©˘ Jli©ı ˝mr∂ |k¨ |g©H §œN h… M‘’... Uljßh† Úh˚n¬ı HC≥† hˆVhs“ı Vhü˘

127. The Hidden Imåm is also referred to as “Íå˙ib al-Amr” (Lord of Command),“al-Qå’im” (He who will arise), “al-Imåm al-MuntaΩar” (the Awaited Imåm), and“Baqiyyat Allåh” (Remnant of God). See M. Moojan, An Introduction to Shi’i Islam

165. >Az•z al-Nasaf • attributed to his teacher, Sa>d al-D•n al-Ham¥’• (d. 649/1252), atheory limiting the number of saints to twelve, the last being the Íå˙ib al-Zamån.Landolt, “Le Paradoxe de la “Face de Dieu”: ‘Azîz-e Nasafî (VIIe/XIIIe siècle) et le“Monisme Ésotérique” de l’Islam” 169; and >Az•zodd•n Nasaf •, Le livre de l’Homme

Parfait I. de Gastines trans. (Paris: Fayard, 1984) 261. Al-Qåshån• calls the Mahdi “ßå˙ibal-wilå ya.” See Lory, Les commentaires esotériques du Coran d’après > Abd al-Razzå q

al-Qå shå n• 142.128. See H. Halm, Shiism 38, and A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism: The Idea of

the Mahdi in Twelver Shi’ism (Abany: State University of New York Press, 1981).129. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 24b.

’0F∆Hn˜H D®hƒ Hcˆ §g¨ S® M ÍhsüH IπMN !H Nmw©H Œhd† ! M h¬b©H Fπh∑ Gr¨ !H ˝M!H Gru©H h¬‘130. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 48a.131. >Al• Waf å’, Waßå yå 5b.

’L ´ *Vm“M hiƒ niΩ ]∂Ó nf…H *Vm“ml† |d† flnf;©H |g©H ]ŸÓ mˆ h¬B G… Fπh∑‘Al-Sha>rån•, al-ˇ abaqå t al-kubr å 2:42, quotes this passage.

132. See the example of Íå˙ib al-waqt at the beginning of the section “The Sealof Sainthood” above. In the writings of Ibn >Arab• it functions as an equivalent to thepole. See Su>åd al-Óak•m, al-Mu> jam al-Í¥ f • (Beirut: Dandara, 1981) 279–81.





K¬ M h˚H ndwƒ §g¨ |g©H §©H Hm¨VH Dgdfß *cˆ G® |j®M Fπh∑ mˆ NMV G… D† |g©H §©H ]d¨Hv©H ]rsrüH H L g¨H ...‘’0|qd† M *VHv¬hƒ !H |d©H L i© Gdfß ! hé L ik¨ |∑hwjøH M |˚hdƒ M |ta… D† L i∆h† ma… M L i∆h˚hdƒ |j¬@¨ M Dkuf∆H

134. That is, the latter makes evident (Ωå hir ) what was hidden (bå† in) in the ear-lier, so the succession of “masters” over historical time is part of the divine process of

Self-differentiation through Self-disclosure.

135. >Al• Waf å’, Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya 61b–62b.

]rdrπ G;©H ! |gf® Îc©H J®m©H Fπh∑ K≈hƒ *nˆhΩ J®M G… Fπh∑ H niz∂ hkˆ K¬ M *nøH G∂bk∆ |©MH G∂Mh∆ m;d†‘J®M G… D† Kduj∂ êf˜H Rüh† ... J®m©H :©C ÔHVHvujßH Ô!hl… |¬hz˚ D† Îc©H §ku˜hƒ J®M G… D† ÔniΩ vπHM

’... J®m©H :©C Ô!hl… |d† hé ˝bkj¬ Kdu∆Compare our earlier comments on ßå˙ib al-zaman. Also, in the Waßå yå 55b we are told

that each spirit (r ¥˙) is the esoteric dimension of the previous spirit.




Works of the Waf å ’s

Ibn Waf å’, Ab¥ al-Is>åd D• wå n Ab• al-Is>å d ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Zåhira (Damascus)ms no. 4676

Waf å’, >Al• al-Bå> ith > alå al-khalåß min s¥’ al-Ωann bi al-khawåΩ British Library

Or.4275 (likely authorship)

Waf å’, >Al• al-Daraja al-> aliyya f • ma>å r • j al-anbiyå ’ ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, B

23127

Waf å’, >Al• Ó ikam > Al• Waf å ’ ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, al-Makh†¥†åt al-Zakiyya,

567

Waf å’, >Al• Ó izb al-fat ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz,

Orientabteilung no. 3888Waf å’, >Al• Kit å b D• wå n Sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussis-

cher Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 7880, no. 7881; and in the Hellmut Ritter

collection at Uppsala University, MF no. 15:4011; and in Dår al-Kutub al-Zåhira

(Damascus) ms no. 4882

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Kit å b al-wå rid å t ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•>

1076; Zak •: 41313. The W å rid å t ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer

Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 3494 is a separate and shorter collection.

Waf å’, >Al• Libå s al-futuwwa ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076;

Zak •: 41313

Waf å’, >Al• Maf å t •˙ al-khazå ’in al-> aliyya ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf

152; and Majåm•> 2, treatise no. 16

Waf å’, >Al• Majm¥> wå rid å t > Al• Ibn Waf å ’ ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf

3593

Waf å’, >Al• al-Maså mi> al-rabbå niyya ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf Óal•m

174; also found as Kit å b al-maså mi> Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf 3593

Bibliography



Waf å’, >Al• Waßå yå sayyid • > Al• Waf å ’ ms in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, no. 1359;

and in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Majåm•> no 21

Waf å’, >Ali Óasan Ab¥ al-Iqbål Ibn al-Qu†b (nineteenth century?). Hadhihi riså la Sha-

jarat al-irshad Egypt: Ma†ba>at al-Su˙uf wa al-Maså˙•f, 1304/1886

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad D• wå n S • d • Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—

Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 8084, no. 8085. (Copies also exist

in Cairo, Paris, Leyden, and Princeton) Published with commentary as al-Mawrid

al-aß f å f • shar d • wå n Sayyid • Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ M. I. Sålim, Cairo: n.p. 2000

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Fuß¥l al-˙aqå ’iq—wa huwa riså la li-l-Sayyid Mu˙ammad Waf å ’

ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313. Published as

Fuß¥l al-˙aqå ’iq li Sayyid • Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ M. I. Sålim ed., Cairo: n.p., 1999

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Hizb al-azal al-shar • f ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo)

Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Ó izb al-fat Cairo: Ma†ba>at al-Adab wa al-Mu’ayyad, 1318/1901

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Ó izb al-så d å t f • jam•> al->å d å t ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya,

Taßawwuf 1546, Taßawwuf 2096

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Ó izb al-så d å t ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Óal•m 34334

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Ó izb al-thanå in Mu˙ammad Fat˙• Ab¥ al-Bakr, Dhail kit å b mur-

shid al-zuwwå r ilå qub¥r al-abr å r Cairo: 1994

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Kit å b al-azal Sa>•d >Abd al-Fattå˙ ed. Beirut: Dår al-Mutanabb•,

1992. Ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Kit å b al-> ur ¥sh ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Taßawwuf 3715,

Taßawwuf 3593, Taßawwuf ˇal>at 1562. Another copy, attributed to >Al• Waf å’ in

the computerized catalog, is al-> Ur ¥sh, Taßawwuf 204

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad al-Ma>å r • j ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076,

Zak •: 41313

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad al-Maqå må t al-saniyya li-l-så da al-ß¥ fiyya wa hiya riså la li-l-

sayyid Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076,

Zak •: 41313; also as Tarjamat al-maqå må t al-mi’a in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—

Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 3004

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Mift å˙ al-s¥r min > ayn al-khabar/khubr ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313; and Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya,

Taßawwuf 204

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Munå jå t ms in al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076,

Zak •: 41313

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Naf å ’is al-> irf å n min anf å s al-Ra˙må n ms in al-Maktaba al-

Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313; and Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya,

Taßawwuf 154; and Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Ori-

entabteilung no. 3000; and Dår al-Kutub al-Zåhiriyya (Damascus) no. 5388. A

short version is appended to Ibn >Arab•’s Kitåb al-Kunh Cairo: M. A. Íab•˙, 1967.Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Sha>å ’ir al-> irf å n ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, no. 23797 b.

(microfilm 27723); and al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •:

41313; and Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung

no. 3248; and Dår al-Kutub al-Zåhiriyya (Damascus) no. 1312

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad al-Íuwar al-n¥r å niyya f • al-> ul¥m al-Sarayå niyya ms in al-Maktaba

al-Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313

220 Bibliography



Waf å’, Mu˙ammad Ta’ß• l al-’azmå n wa taf ß• l al-’akwå n ms in al-Maktaba al-

Azhariyya (Cairo) Majåm•> 1076, Zak •: 41313

Waf å’, Mu˙ammad WaΩ• fat al-fajr andWaΩ• fat al-ßub˙ (Attached to ms al-Tarjama al-

Waf å ’iyya, Leiden University, Or. 14.437)

Sources and Studies in Arabic

>Abd al-Wahhåb, H. Kit å b al-umr Beirut: Dår al-Gharb al-Islåm•, 1990

Ab¥ Bakr, M. Dhail kit å b murshid al-zuwwå r ilå qub¥r al-abr å r Cairo: n.p. 1994

Ab¥ al-La†å’if, A. al-Mina˙ al-ilå hiyya fi manå qib al-så d å t al-Waf å ’iyya Dår al-Kutub

al-Mißriyya, Tår•kh 1151; and Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, no. 1200

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib, I. Fara˙ al-asmå> bi rukhaß al-samå> Tunis: Dår al->Arabiyya li al-

Kitåb, 1985

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib, I. Kit å b al-tajalliyå t ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer

Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 3097

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib, I. Kit å b qawå n• n ˙ikam al-Ishr å q Cairo: Maktabat al-Azhariyya li al-

Turåth, 1999

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib, I. Riså la f • al-taßawwuf ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussis-

cher Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung no. 3030

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib, I. Silå˙ al-Waf å ’iyya bi thaghr al-Iskandariyya a.k.a. Riså lat al-

awliyå ’ ms in London, Library of the India Office, no. 669, no. 416

>Af •f •, A. al-Malå matiyya wa al-Í¥ fiyya wa al-Futuwwa Cairo: al-Båb• al-Óalab•, 1945

al-Akhm•m•, al-Qå m¥s al-jad • d f • al-qaßå ’id wa al-anå sh• d li al-så da al-Shå dhiliyya

Cairo: n.p. 1972

>Ammår, S. Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• Cairo: Dår al-Ta’l•f, 1951

Åmul•, H. Kit å b naßß al-nuß¥ß f • shar al-fuß¥s H. Corbin and O. Ya˙ia eds. Tehran:

Bibliothèque Iranienne, 1975

Åmul•, H. Tafs• r al-mu˙•† al-a>Ωam Tehran, Wizarat al-Thaqafa, 1995

Anonymous, H å dhå kit å b al-muntaqå min kalå m ahl taqå li al-shaykh Ab• Ó asan al-

Shå dhil• ms in Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientab-teilung no. 3009

Anonymous, Imå† a niqå b al-rayb > an wuj¥h rijå l al-ghayb ms in Dår al-Kutub al-

Mißriyya Majåm•> 18

Anonymous, Riså la f • nasab al-så d å t al-ashr å f al-Waf å ’iyya ms in Dår al-Kutub al-

Mißriyya, Tår•kh †al>at, 1819

Anonymous, Riså lat al-Shaykh Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• ms in Dår al-Kutub al-

Mißriyya, Taßawwuf Taym¥r 180

Anonymous, WaΩ• fa al-Shå dhiliyya al-Mash• shiyya, wa al-Qasidah al-rayah al-Shar-

ishiyya Alexandria: Ma†ba>a Jurj• Gharzuz•, 1905Anonymous, ed. Majm¥> at awr å d saniyya li al-S å d å t al-Shå dhiliyya Damascus: al-

Ma†ba>a al-Hifniyya, 1883

Anßår•, Z. Ó aqiqat al-taßawwuf al-Islå m• , yahwa kitabayn: al-Futu˙å t al-ilå hiyya fi naf

arwå˙ al-dhawå t al-inså niyya Cairo: Maktabat al-Adab, 1992

al->Asqalån•, I. al-Durar al-k å mina 8 vols. Hyderabad: Ma†ba>a Majlis Då’irat al-

Ma>årif, 1929–31

Bibliography 221



al->Asqalån•, I. Inbå ’ al-ghumr bi-anbå ’ al-> umr 3 vols. Óasan al-Óabash• ed. Cairo:

1971

>A††år, Far•d al-D•n Tadhkirat al-awliyå Tehran: 1977

Båbå, A. Nayl al-ibtihå j bi-ta† r • z al-D• bå j 2 vols. Tripoi: al-Jamahiriyya al->Arabiyya

al-Libiyya, 1989

al-Badaw•, >A. T å ’r • kh al-taßawwuf al-islå m• min al-bidaya ˙at å nihå yat al-qarn al-

thå n• Beirut: Dår al-Qalam, 1978

al-Baghdåd•, I. Hadiyyat al->å rif • n Beirut: 1982

al-Baghdåd•, I. °∂å˙ al-makn¥n f • dhayl > alå kashf al-zun¥n 2 vols. Beirut: 1982

Bakr•, M. Kit å b ar å j• z al-Arab Cairo: n.p., 1927

Bakr•, M. Kit å b bayt al-Íå d å t al-Waf å ’iyya Cairo: n.p., (before 1908)

Bakr•, M. Kit å b bayt al-Íidd • q Cairo: Ma†ba>at al-Mu’ayyid, 1905

Bakr•, M. Kit å b al-ta> l• m wa al-irshå d Cairo: n.p., n.d.

Bakur, A. Hadhihi hiya al-Shå dhiliyya Aleppo: Maktabat al-Naßr, 1953

Bannån•, F. Kit å b ithå f ahl al-> inå yah al-rabbå niyya fi itti˙å d † uruq ahl Allå h Cairo: al-

Ma†ba>a al-Amira al-Sharifiyya, 1906

al-Båqillån•, I > jå z al-Qur’å n S. A. Íaqr ed. Cairo: Dår al-Ma>årif, 1964

Baql•, R. Kit å b al-ighå na in Quatre traités inédits de R¥ zbehå n Baql• Shir å z• P. Ballan-

fat, ed. Tehran: IFRI, 1998

Baql•, R. Sayr al-arwå˙, Kit å b al-ighå na, Lawå mi> al-tawh• d , Maså lik al-tawh• d in

Quatre traités inédits de R¥ zbehå n Baql• Shir å z• P. Ballanfat ed. Tehran: IFRI,

1998

Barazesh, A. ed. A Concordance of the Be˙å r al-anwå r 30 vols. Tehran: Ministry of Cul-

ture, 1994

Battan¥n•, A. al-Sirr al-ßaf • f • manå qib al-Sul†å n al- Ó anafi Qu† b al-Ghawth Shams al-

D• n Sayyid Mu˙ammad al-Taym• al-Bakr • al-Shå dhil• al-Íidd • q• Cairo: Sålim

A˙mad Shararat al-Qabbån•, 1888

Baytar, A. Ó ilyat al-bashar f • ta’r • kh al-qarn al-thå lith al-> ashar 3 vols. Damascus:

1961-63,

al-Bidl•s•, >A. Zwei Mystische Schriften des > Ammå r al-Bidl• s• E. Badeen ed. Beirut:

Franz Steiner, 1999B¥ Dhinah, M. Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• Tunis: Dår al-Turk • li al-Nashr, 1989

al-Bukhår•, M. Ía˙•˙ al-Bukhå r • 8 vols. Beirut: Dår al-Fikr, 1994

al-Dard•r, A. Mishk å t al-asr å r > alå qawl al->å rif Sayyid Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ ms in al-

Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) 16289 (majåm•> 412) fols. 1–11 (Published in Cairo,

1912?)

Darn•qa, M. al-ˇ ar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya wa a> lå muhå Beirut: al-Mu’assasa al-Jåm•>iyya,

1990

al-Fås•, A. Shar ˙izb al-kab• r Cairo: n.p., 1998

al-Fås•, Ó. Kit å b † abaqå t al-Shå dhiliyya al-kubr å Cairo: Maktabat al-Qåhira, 1928 (or J å mi> al-kar å må t al-> aliyya f • † abaqå t al-så dat al-Shå dhiliyya)

Óå jj• Khal•fa, Kashf al-Ωun¥n G. Flügel ed. Reprinted from the 1842 ed., by New York:

Johnson Reprint, 1964

al-Óak •m, S. al-Mu> jam al-ß¥ f • Beirut: Dandara, 1981

al-Óamadån•, >A. Tamh• d å t Tehran: University of Tehran, 1962

222 Bibliography



al-Iskandar•, I. al- Ó ikam Cairo: Maktabat al-Jind•, 1977al-Iskandar•, I. La†å ’if al-minan A. Ma˙m¥d ed. Cairo: Ma†b¥>åt al-Sha>b, 1986. Translated

as La sagesse des maîtres soufis E. Geoffroy trans. Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1998al-Iskandar•, I. Mift å˙ al-falå˙ wa mißbå˙ al-arwå˙ Cairo: Muß†afa al-Båb• al-Óalab•,

1961 Translated as The Key to Salvation M.A. Koury Danner trans. Cambridge:Islamic Texts Society, 1996

al-Iskandar•, I. al-Qaßd al-mujarrad f • ma> rifat al-Ism al-Mufarrad Cairo: al-Ma†ba>aal-Mißriyya, 1930; and recently in Cairo by Dår al-Jawåmi> al-Kalim, n.d. MauriceGloton has translated this work as Traité sur le nom Allå h Paris: Deux Océans,1981

al-Iskandar•, I. Shar qaß• da “M å ladhdha al-> aysh illå ßu˙ubat al-fuqar å ’ “ Cairo: al-Ma†ba>at al->Uthmåniyya, 1935

al-Iskandar•, I. T å j al-> ar ¥s Cairo: Dår Jawåmi> al-Kalim, n.d.al-Iskandar•, I. al-Tanw• r f • isqå† al-tadb• r Cairo: >Ålam al-fikr, 1998. Translated by D.

Penot as De l’abandon de la volonté propre Lyon: Alif, 1997al-Jurjån•, A. Ta> r • f å t Cairo: al-Óalab•, 1938al-Kalåbådh•, A. al-Ta> arruf li-madhhab ahl al-taßawwuf A. Ma˙m¥d ed. Cairo: 1960.

Translated as The Doctrine of the Í¥ f • s A.J. Arberry trans. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1989

al-Kasråw•, A. “Al-†uruq al-ß¥fiyya bi-ßf åqs; mawåriduhå al-iqtißådiyya wa ma>lamuhåal-athariyya khilål al-qarnayn al-thåmin wa al-tåsi> >ashr m•låd•” Shahå da al-Kaf å ’

f • al-ba˙th Kulliyyat al-Ådåb T¥nis 1980al-Kharråz, A. Kit å b al-kashf wa al-bayå n Baghdad: 1967Khulsi, U. Kit å b al-sa>å da al-adabiyya fi qaßå ’id wa-anå sh• d al-så dat al-Shå dhiliyya

Alexandria: A˙mad Óusayn, 1925 (?)Kubrå, N. Die Fawå ’i˙ al-jamå l wa fawå ti˙ al-jalå l F. Meier ed. Wiesbaden: Steiner

Verlag, 1957. Translated as Les éclosions de la beauté et les parfums de la majesté

P. Ballanfat trans. Nîmes: Éditions de l’éclat, 2001Ku˙˙ålå, >U. A> lå m al-niså ’ 5 vols. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Risåla, 1977Ku˙˙ålå, >U. Mu> jam al-mu’allif • n Beirut: Dår I˙yå’ al-Turåth al->Arab•, 1988

Madk¥r, >A. al-Walå ya > inda Mu y al-D• n Ibn > Arab• Cairo University: doctoral thesis,1980.

al-Ma˙all•, Jalål al-D•n, and Jalål al-D•n al-Suy¥†• Tafs• r al-Jalå layn Beirut: Dår al-Ma>rifa, n.d.

Måhir, S. Maså jid Mißr wa awliyå ’u-ha al-ßalih¥n Cairo: Wizårat al-awqåf, 1980Ma˙m¥d, >A. al->å rif bi-Allå h Ab¥ al-> Abbå s al-Murs• Cairo: Dår al-Sha>b, 1969Ma˙m¥d, >A. al-Madrasa al-Shå dhiliyya al-˙ad • tha wa Imå muhå Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-

Shå dhil• Cairo: Dår al-Kutub al-Óad•tha, 1967Ma˙m¥d, >A. al-Qu† b al-Shah• d S • d • > Abd al-Salå m Ibn Bash• sh Cairo: Dår al-Sha>b, 1976

Makhl¥f, M. Shajarat al-n¥r al-zakiyya f • † abaqå t al-M å likiyya Cairo: n.p. 1950al-Majlis•, M. Bi˙å r al-anwå r 106 vols. Beirut: 1983al-Makk•, A. Q¥t al-qul¥b Cairo: Ma†ba>a al-Anwår al-Mu˙ammadiyya, 1975al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya, Fihris al-Kutub al-mawj¥da bi al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya ilå

1366/1947 7 vols. Cairo: Ma†ba> al-Azhar, 1948al-Måli˙, R. Fihris makh†¥†å t Då r al-Kutub al-Z å hiriyya 3 vols. Damascus: Majma> al-

Lugha al->Arabiyya bi Dimashq, 1978

224 Bibliography



al-Maqr•z•, T. al-Mawå ’iΩ wa al-i> tibå r bi dhikr al-khi† a† wa al-å thå r 2 vols. Bulaq:

1853

al-Maysåw•, >A. “Zawåyå al-was† al-gharb• wa dawruhå al-ijtimå>i” in Majalla al-˙aya

al-thiqå fiyya T¥nis 7th year, no. 21 May, 1982

al-Min¥f •, Jamharat al-awliyå ’ wa a> lå m ahl al-taßawwuf 2 vols. al-Óalab• ed. Cairo:

al-Ma†ba>a al-Madan•, 1967

Mubårak, >A. al-Khi† a† al-tawfiqiyya al-jad • da li-Mißr wa al-Qå hira 14 vols. Cairo: al-Hay’a al->Åmma, 1986

Mubårak, Z. al-Taßawwuf al-islå m• f • al-adab wa al-akhlå q 2 vols. Cairo: Dår al-Kitåb

al->Arab•, 1954

al-Munåw•, M. al-Kawå kib al-durriyya 4 vols. Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya li al-

Turåth, 1994

Muß†af å, F. al-Binå ’ al-ijtimå>• li al-† ar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya fi Mißr: dir å sa fi al-anthr ¥b¥-

l¥ jiyya al-ijtimå> iyya Alexandria: al-Hai’a al-Mißriyya li al-kitåb, 1980

al-Nabahån•, Y. J å mi> kar å må t al-awliyå ’ 2 vols. Beirut: al-Maktaba al-Thiqåfiyya, 1991

Najå, M. Kashf al-asr å r li-tanw• r al-afk å r Beirut: n.p. 1978

al-Namnam, Ó. Raså ’il al-Shaykh > Al• Y ¥suf wa Íafiyya al-S å d å t Cairo: Merit li al-

Nashr wa al-Ma>l¥måt, 2001

al-Qåshån•, >A. Kit å b iß† ilå˙å t al-ß¥ fiyya (A glossary of sufi techincal terms) N. Safwat

ed. and trans. London: Octagon, 1991

al-Qåshån•, >A. Shar fuß¥ß al-˙ikam 3rd ed., Cairo: al-Óalab•, 1987

al-Qawuqj•, A. Kit å b al-badr al-mun• r > alå Ó izb al-Shå dhilå al-kab• r Alexandria: al-

Ma†ba>a al-Nåßriyya, 1861

al-Qushayr•, A. al-Riså lat al-Qurshayriyya A. Ma˙m¥d ed. Cairo: al-Sha>b, 1989al-Qushayr•, Das Sendschreiben al-Qushayr • s über das Sufitum R. Gramlich trans.

Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1989

Råd•, S. Qå n¥n tar • qa al-S å da al-H å midiyya al-Shå dhiliyya Beirut: n.p. 1960

al-Råhim, M. Ab¥ al- Ó asan al-Shå dhil• al-wal• : s• ratuhu, maqå muhu wa zuwwå ruhu

Tunis: Maktaba al->Aj•l• bi-Zaghwån, 1987

al-Rashåd, R. Majm¥> a qaßå ’id Aleppo: 1972

al-Rif å>• , A. Qilå dat al-na˙r f • shar Ó izb al-ba˙r Cairo: n.p., 1931Rizq, >Å. Khå nqå wå t al-ß¥ fiyya f • Mißr 2 vols. Cairo: Madbouli, 1997

R¥m•, J. The Mathnaw• of Jalålu’dd•n R¥m• R. A. Nicholson ed. and trans. London:Luzac, 1926

al-Rund•, I. al-Raså ’il al-ßughr å P. Nwyia ed. Beirut: Dår al-Mashriq, 1974

Íaf • al-D•n, La Riså la de Íaf • al-D• n Ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r Ibn Z å fir: Biographies des

maîtres spirituels connus par un cheikh égyptien du VII/XIII siècle D. Gril ed. and

trans. Cairo: I.F.A.O., 1986

al-Sakhåw•, M. al- Îaw’ al-lå mi> li-ahl al-qarn al-t å si> 12 vols. Cario: Maktabat al-

Quds•, 1934Sålim, >A. T å r • kh al-Iskandariyya wa ˙a∂å ratuhå f • al-> aßr al-islå m• Alexandria:

Mu’asasa Shabåb al-Jåmi>a, 1982

Sålim, M. Fakk al-† alå sim min > ur ¥sh al-inså niyya li Sayyid • Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ Cairo:

n.p., n.p.

Sålim, M., ed. al-Naf a al-khatmiyya f • tarjama wa > ul¥m wa awr å d al-S å dat al-

Waf å ’iyya Cairo: n.p. 1996

Bibliography 225



al-Sammån, >A. Riså lat al-futu˙å t al-ilå hiyya f • kayfiyya sul¥k al-tar • qa al-Mu˙am-

madiyya Cairo: n.p., 1326/1908

al-Sarrå j, A. Kit å b al-luma> f • al-tasawwuf Cairo: Dår al-Kutub al-Óad•tha, 1960

al-Shådhil•, Ab¥ al-Íalå˙ >Al• Mu˙sin Ta’z• r al-anf å s bi manå qib Ab• al- Ó asan al-

Shå dhil• ms in Dår al-Kutub al-Mißriyya, Tår•kh 388

al-Shafei, H. Fuß¥l f • al-taßawwuf Cairo: Dår al-Thiqåfa li al-Nashr wa al-Tawz•>, 1996

Shaf •q, A. Mudhakkir å t • f • niß f qarn 3 vols. Cairo: Ma†ba>a Mißr, 1934

al-Sha>rån•, >A. al-Ajwaba al-mar ∂ iyya > an a’ima al-fuqaha wa al-ß¥ fiyya >Abd al-Bår•Mu˙ammad Då’¥d ed. Cairo: Maktaba Umm al-Qar•, 2002

al-Sha>rån•, >A. al-Anwå r al-qudsiyya Cairo: n.p. 1962

al-Sha>rån•, >A. Durar al-ghawåß > alå fat å wå Sayyid • > Al• al-Khawwåß Beirut: Dår al-

Kutub al->Ilmiyya, 1999

al-Sha>rån•, >A. al-Kibr • t al-a˙mar fi bayå n > ul¥m al-Shaykh al-Akbar (on the margin of

al-Yawå q• t )al-Sha>rån•, >A. al-Tabaqå t al-kubr å 2 vols. Beirut: Dår al-J•l, 1988

al-Sha>rån•, >A. al-Yawå q• t wa al-jawå hir f • bayå n > aqå ’id al-ak å bir 2 vols. Cairo: al-

Båb• al-Óalab•, 1959

al-Shawbar• al-Shåfi>•, M. al-Tarjama al-Waf å ’iyya ms in Leiden University, Or. 14.437

al-Sijistån•, A. Kashf al-Ma j¥b Tehran: Institut Franco-iranien, 1949

al-Subk •, Taq• al-D•n Shif å ’ al-siqå m f • ziyå rat khayr al-anå m Beirut: 1978

al-Subk •, Tå j al-D•n ˇ abaqå t al-shå fi> iyya al-kubr å 10 vols. M. al-Tanåh• ed. Cairo: al-

Båb• al-Óalab•, 1964

al-Suhraward•, A.> Awå rif al-ma>å rif Cairo: Maktabat al-Qåhira, n.d.

al-Sulam•, ˇ abaqå t al-ß¥ fiyya Aleppo: Dår al-Kitåb al-Naf •s, 1986

al-Suy¥†•, J. Bughyat al-wu>å h Cairo: al-Båb• al-Óalab•, 1964

al-Suy¥†•, J. Ó usn al-mu˙å dara f • akhbå r Mißr wa al-Qå hira 2 vols. K. al-Manß¥r ed.

Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al->Ilmiyya, 1997

al-Suy¥†•, J. Kawkab al-R¥∂ a M. Shashtawi ed. Cairo: Dår al-åf åq al->arabiyya, 2002

al-Suy¥†•, J. Ta’y• d al-˙aq• qa al-> aliyya wa tashy• d al-tar • qa al-Shå dhiliyya A. al-

Óasan• ed. Cairo: n.p. 1974

al-Taftazån•, A. Ibn> A†å ’ Allah al-Sikandar • wa taßawwufuhu Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Anjlu al-Mißriyya, 1969

al-Taftazån•, A. “al-Turuq al-ß¥fiyya f • Mißr” in Majalla Kulliyyat al- Åd å b (Cairo) 25,

1963

al-Tahånaw•, M. Kashshå f iß† ilå˙å t al-fun¥n 4 vols. Cairo: al-Mu’assasa al-Mißriyya al-

>Åmma, 1963

al-Taråbulus•, M. Shar riså la > Abd al-Salå m b. Mash• sh ms in Tunis, Bibliothèque

Nationale, al-Maktaba al->Abdaliyya, no. 775

al-Tirmidh•, Ó. Kit å b khatm al-awliyå ’ O. Ya˙ia ed. Beirut: al-Ma†ba>a al-Kåth¥likiyya,

n.d.al-Tirmidh•, Ó. Riyå∂ at al-nafs I. Shams al-D•n ed. Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al->Ilmiyya, 2002

Tum• (or Tulm•), M. ˇ abaqå t al-Shå dhiliyya al-kubr å Beirut: Dar al-J•l, 1996

al->Ulaym•, M. al-Uns al-jal• l bi-ta’r • kh al-Quds Cairo: n.p. 1866

al-Uqßurå’• al-Shådhil•, Shar al-Uqßur å ’• > alå kalima Sayyid • Mu˙ammad Waf å ’ ms in

al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya (Cairo) 4464 (72)

226 Bibliography



Wafa’•, Ma˙m¥d ibn >Af •f al-D•n Ma>å hid al-talq• q f • radd al-munkir • n > alå ahl al-† ar • qli al-S å dat al-Shå dhiliyya al-Waf å ’iyya al-F å siyya Cairo: Ma†ba>a Mu˙ammad >Al•Subayh, 1960

al-Wå˙id• al-Naysåb¥r•, A. Asbå b al-nuz¥l Beirut: al-Maktabat al-Thiqåfiyya, n.d.

al-Yåfi>i, >A. Mir’å t al-janå n 4 vols. Beirut: 1970

al-Zab•d•, M. Raf > niqå b al-khaf å > an-man intahå ilå Waf å wa Ab• al-Waf å ms in Dår al-

Kutub al-Mißriyya, Tår•kh Taym¥r 2323

al-Zajjå j•, >A. Kit å b al- °∂å˙ f • al-> ilal wa al-na˙w Cairo: Dår al->Ur¥ba, 1959

Zakh¥ra, I. Mir’å t al-> Asr f • ta’r • kh wa rus¥m ak å bir rijå l Mißr 3 vols. Cairo: Ma†ba>a>Um¥miyya, 1897

Zarr¥q, A. Ó ikam Ibn > A†å ’Allå h; shar al-Shaykh Zarr ¥q Cairo: al-Sha>b, 1985

Ziedan, Y., ed. Fihris makh†¥†å t al-jå mi> a al-Iskandariyya Cairo: Ma>had al-Makh†¥†åt

al->Arabiyya, 1995

Ziedan, Y,. ed. Fihris makh†¥†å t Ab• al-> Abbå s al-Murs• Alexandria: al-Hay’a al->Åmma

li Maktabat al-Iskandariyya, 1997

Ziedan, Y, ed. Fihris makh†¥†å t rif å> a rafi> al-Tan†å w• Cairo: Ma>had al-Makh†¥†åt al-

>Arabiyya, 1996

Ziedan, Y. Shu> ar å ’al-s¥ fiyya al-majh¥liyya Beirut: Dår al-J•l, 1996

al-Zirikl•, K. al-A> lå m: Qå m¥s tar å jim li-ashhar al-rijå l wa al-niså ’ 8 vols, Beirut: Dår

al->Ilm li al-Malåy•n, 1990 (9th ed.)

Studies Not in Arabic

Abdel Kader, A. The Life, Personality, and Writings of al-Junayd London: Luzac, 1962

Ab¥ Madyan, The Way of Ab¥ Madyan V. Cornell ed. and trans. Cambridge: Islamic

Texts Society, 1996

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib, Illumination in Islamic Mysticism (Qwå n• n ˙ikam al-ishr å q) E. Jurj•trans. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1938

Addas, C. “L’oeuvre poétique d’Ibn ‘Arab• et sa réception” Studia Islamica no. 91, 2003

Addas, C. Quest for the Red Sulfur: The Life of Ibn ‘Arab• P. Kingsley trans. Cam-bridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993

>Aff •f •, A. The Mystical Philosophy of Mu y• d-D• n Ibn al-> Arab• Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press, 1939

Ahlwardt, W. Die Handschriften-verzeichisse der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin

Berlin: 1891

Alvarez, A. “ Muwashsha˙ (pl. muwashsha˙å t )” in The Encyclopedia of Arabic Litera-

ture (2 vols.) J. Meisami and P. Starken eds. London: Routledge, 1988

Alvi, S. “The Mujaddid and Tajd • d Traditions in the Indian Subcontinent” in Journal of

Turkish Studies 18, 1994.Aminrezavi, M. Suhrawardi and the School of Illumination Surrey: Curzon, 1997

Amir-Moezzi, M. A. The Divine Guide in Early Shi’ism D. Streight trans. Albany: State

Universsity of New York Press, 1994

Amri-Moezzi, A., ed. Le voyage initiatique en terre d’islam: ascensions célestes et

itinéraires spirituels Paris: Peeters, 1996

Bibliography 227



Anawati, G. Études de philosophie musulmane, Paris: Vrin, 1974Arnaldez, R. “Ibn Rushd” in Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition)Aouanat, Z. Ibn Mash• sh, maître d’al-Shå dhil• Casablanca: Najah El Jadida, 1998Asin Palacios, M. “Characteres generales de la Escuela Shadhil• y su metodo espiritual”

Al-Andalus 1, 1954Asin Palacios, M. El Islam cristianizado, estudio del sufismo a través de las obras de

Abenarabi de Murcia Madrid: 1931Badaw•, >A. La transmission de la philosophie greque au monde arabe (2nd ed.) Paris:

Vrin, 1987Baldick, J. Imaginary Muslims: The Uwaysi Sufis of Central Asia London: Tauris, 1993.Baldick, J. Mystical Islam New York: New York University Press, 1989Bannerth, E. “La Rif å>iyya en Égypte” Mélanges de l’Institut Dominicain d’Études Ori-

entales 10, 1970Berkey, J. Popular Preaching and Religious Authority in the Medieval Islamic Near

East Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001Botros, S. Ab¥ al-> Abbå s al-Murs• : A Study of Some Aspects of His Mystical Thought

McGill University, M.A. thesis, 1976Boullata, I. “The Rhetorical Interpretation of the Qur’ån: I> jåz and Related Topics” in

Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur’an A. Rippin ed. Oxford:Clarendon, 1988

Böwering, G. The Mystical Vision of Existence in Classical Islam: The Qur’anic

Hermeneutics of the Sufi Sahl at-Tustari (d. 283/896) Berlin: de Gruyter, 1980Brockelmann, C. Geschichte der Arabischen Litteratur 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1937–42,

and spplement vols. 1943–49Brown, P. The Cult of the Saints Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981Buehler, A. Sufi Heirs of the Prophet: The Indian Naqshbandiyya and the Rise of the

Mediating Shaykh Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1998Burgoyne, M. H. Mamluk Jerusalem: An Architechtural Study British School of Arche-

ology in Jerusalem, 1987Chabbi, J. “Remarques sur le développement historique des mouvements ascétiques et

mystiques au Khurasan” in Studia Islamica 46, 1977Chatelier (Le), A. Les confréries musulmanes du Hedjaz Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1887Chih, R. “Les débuts d’une † ar • qa...” in Le saint et son milieu ou comment lire les sources

hagiographiques R. Chih and D. Gril eds. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie ori-entale, 2000

Chih, R. Le soufisme au quotidien: Confréries d’Égypte au XXè siècle Paris: Sinbad, 2000Chittick, W. “The Five Divine Presences: From al-Q¥naw• to al-Qaysar•” in The Mus-

lim World 72, 1982Chittick, W. Ibn > Arab• ’s Metaphysics of Imagination: The Sufi Path of Knowledge

Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989Chittick, W. “Íadr al-D•n al-Q¥naw• on the Oneness of Being” in International Philo-

sophical Quarterly 21/2Chittick, W. “The School of Ibn >Arab•” in History of Islamic Philosophy S. H. Nasr

and O. Leaman eds. London: Routledge, 1996Chittick, W. The Self-disclosure of God: Principles of Ibn > Arab• ’s Cosmology Albany:

State University of New York Press, 1998

228 Bibliography



Chittick, W. “A Shadhili Presence in Sh>ite Islam” in Sophia Perennis: The Bulletin of the Imperial Iranian Academy of Philosophy 1/1, 1975

Chittick, W. The Sufi Path of Knowledge: Ibn > Arab• ’s Metaphysics of ImaginationAlbany: State University of New York Press, 1989

Chodkiewicz, M. Aw˙ad al-D• n Balyå n• : Epître sur l’unicité absolue Paris: Deux Océans,1982

Chodkiewicz, M. “The Banner of Praise” in Foundations of the Spiritual Life Accordingto Ibn > Arabi: Praise S. Hirtenstein ed. Oxford: Muhyiddin Ibn >Arabi Society, 1997

Chodkiewicz, M. “The Diffusion of Ibn >Arab•’s Doctrine” in Journal of the Mu yiddin Ibn > Arab• Society 9, 1991

Chodkiewicz, M. “Ibn >Arab•, la lettre et la loi” in Actes du colloque: Mystique, cultureet société Paris: 1983

Chodkiewicz, M. An Ocean without Shore: Ibn > Arabi, the Book, and the Law D.Streight trans. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993

Chodkiewicz, M. “Le Procès posthume d’Ibn >Arab•” in Islamic Mysticism Contested F.deJong and B. Radtke eds. Leiden: Brill, 1999

Chodkiewicz, M. “La sainteté et les saints en islam” in Le Culte des saints dans lemonde musulman H. Chambert-Loir and Cl. Guilliot eds. Paris: École Françaisd’Extrème Orient, 1995

Chodkiewicz, M. “La sainteté féminine dans l’hagiographie islamique” in Saints orien-taux D. Aigle ed. Paris: DeBoccard, 1995

Chodkiewicz, M. Seal of the Saints: Prophethood and Sainthood in the Doctrine of Ibn> Arab• L. Sherrard trans. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1993

Commission des sciences et arts d’Égypte. Description de l’Égypte 24 vols. text, 11vols. plates, 3 vols. atlas, 1809–29

Corbin, H. Creative Imagination in the Sufism of Ibn > Arabi R. Manheim trans. Prince-ton: Princeton University Press, 1969

Corbin, H. En Islam Iranien 4 vols. Paris: Gallimard, 1971Corbin, H. Histoire de la philosophie islamique Paris: Gallimard, 1986Corbin, H. The Man of Light in Iranian Sufism N. Pearson trans. Boulder: Shambala, 1978

Corbin, H. Temps cyclique et gnose ismaélienne Paris: Berg International, 1982Cornell, V. Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism Austin: Uni-

versity of Texas Press, 1998Cornell, V. The Way of Ab¥ Madyan Cambridge: Isalmic Texts Society, 1996Daftary, F. The Ismå>• l• s, Their History and Doctrines Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-

sity Press, 1990Danner, V. Ibn > A†å ’Allå h: The Book of Wisdom New York: Paulist, 1978Danner, V. Ibn > A†å ’ Allå h: A Sufi of Mamluk Egypt PhD. thesis, Harvard University,

1970

Danner, V. “The Shådhiliyya and North African Sufism” in Islamic Spirituality: Mani- festations S. H. Nasr ed. New York: Crossroads, 1991

De Jong, F. “Les confréries mystiques musulmanes au Machreq arabe” in Les ordresmystiques dans l’Islam A. Popovic and G. Veinstein eds. Paris: École des HautesÉtudes en Sciences Sociales, 1986

De Jong, F. “On Peter Gran, Islamic Roots of Capitalism: Egypt, 1760–1840 A reviewarticle with author’s reply” International Journal of Middle East Studies 14, 1982

Bibliography 229



Gibb, H. A. R. and J. Kramers, eds. Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam Leiden: Brill, 1991

Gilsenan, M. Saint and Sufi in Modern Egypt: An Essay in the Sociology of Religion

Oxford: Clarendon, 1973

Gobillot, G. La pensée d’al- Ó ak • m al-Tirmidh• (Ab¥ > Abd Allå h Mu˙ammad > ibn > Al• ,

m. 318/930). Ou: de la “Profondeur des choses” Doctoral thesis, Lyon, Université

Jean Moulin, 1989

Goichon, A.-M. Lexique de la langue philosophique d’Ibn S • na Paris: Desclé de Brouwer,

1938

Goiten, S. Studies in Islamic History and Institutions Leiden: Brill, 1968

Goldziher, I. Muslim Studies (2 vols.) London: Allen and Unwin, 1962

Goodman, L. Avicenna London: Routledge, 1992

Graham, W. Divine Word and Prophetic Word in Early Islam The Hague: Mouton,

1977

Gramlich, R. Die Gaben der Erkenntnisse des > Umar as-Suhraward • (> Awå rif al-

ma>å rif) Wiesbaden: F. Steiner, 1978

Gramlich, R. Die schiitischen Derwischorden Persiens 3 vols. Wiesbaden: Steiner,

1965–1981

Gramlich, R. Das Sendschreiben al-Qushayris über das Sufitum Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1989

Gramlich, R. Die Wunder der Freunde Gottes Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1986

Gramlich, R. Ab¥ al->Abbås ibn >A†å’: Sufi und Koranausleger Stuttgart: Steiner, 1995

Gran, P. The Islamic Roots of Capitalism: Egypt, 1760–1840 Cairo: American univer-

sity in Cairo Press, 1998

Gril, D. “ Le kit å b al-inbå h > alå † ar • q Allå h de >Abdallåh Badr al-Óabash•: un témoignage

de l’enseignement spirituel de Mu˙y•-l-d•n Ibn >Arab•” in Annales Islamologiques

15, 1979

Gril, D. “Le miracle en Islam, critère de la sainteté?” in Saints orientaux D. Aigle ed.

Paris: DeBoccard, 1995

Gril, D. “Le saint fondateur” in Les voies d’Allah: Les ordres mystiques dans le monde

musulman des origines à aujourd’hui A. Popovic and G. Veinstein eds Paris: Fayard,

1996.

Gril, D. “Sources manuscrites de l’histoire du soufisme à Dår al-Kutub; un premierbilan” Bulletin Critique des Annales Islamologiques 1994

Halm, H. Shiism J. Watson trans. Edinburgh: Edinbugh University Press, 1991

Haneberg, K. “Ali Abulhasan Schadeli” in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen

Gesellschaft 1853

Heath, P. Allegory and Philosophy in Avicenna (Ibn S • nå ) Philadelphia: University of

Pennsylvania Press, 1992

Hitti, P. et al. Descrtiptive Catalog of the Garrett Collection of Arabic Manuscripts in

the Princeton University Library Princeton: 1938

Hoffman-Ladd, V. “Devotion to the Prophet and His Family in Egyptian Sufism” in International Journal of Middle East Studies 4, 1992

Homerin, E. From Arab Poet to Muslim Saint: Ibn al-Farid, His Verse, and His Shrine

Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1997

al-Hujw•r•, The Kashf al-Ma j¥b: The Oldest Persian Treatise on Íufiism R. A. Nicholson

trans. London: Luzac, 1936

Bibliography 231



Ibn >Arab•’s Sufis of Andalusia (R¥˙ al-quds) R.W. J. Austin trans. London: Allen and

Unwin, 1971

Ibn Battuta, The Travels of Ibn Battuta H. Gibb trans. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-sity Press, 1958

Ibn al-Fåri∂, Ibn al-F å ri∂ ; Sufi Verse, Saintly Life E. Homerin trans. New York: Paulist

Press, 2001

Ibn Khald¥n, The Muqaddima: An Introduction to History F. Rosenthal trans. 3 vols.

New York: Bollingen, 1958

Ibn al-Sabbågh, The Mystical Teachings of al-Shå dhil• (Durrat al-asr å r) E. Douglas

trans. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993

Ibn Sina, Livre des directives et remarques A. Goichon trans. Paris: Vrin, 1951

Izutsu, T. The Concept of Reality and Existence Tokyo: Keio Institute of Cultural and

Linguistic Studies, 1971

Izutsu, T. Creation and the Timeless Order of Things Ashland OR: White Cloud Press,

1994

Izutsu, T. Sufism and Taoism: A Comparative Study of Key Philosophical Concepts

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983

al-Jabart•, > Abd al-Ra˙må n al-Jabart • ’s History of Egypt (> Ajå ’ib al- Åthå r) T. Phillip

and M. Perlmann eds. Stuttgart: Steiner, 1994

Jabre, F. Essai sur le lexique de Ghazali Beirut: Université Libannaise, 1985

Jahanbakhsh F. “The Pir-Mur•d Relationship in the Thought of >Ayn al-Qu∂åt al-

Hamadån•” in Consciousness and Reality: Studies in Memory of Toshihiko Izutsu

J. Åshtiyån• et al. eds. Leiden: Brill, 2000

Johansen, J. Sufism and Islamic Reform in Egypt New York: Clarendon, 1996

Johnson, K. “Royal Pilgrims: Mamluk Accounts of the Pilgrimage to Mecca” in Studia

Islamica no. 91, 2000

al-Junayd Enseignement spirituel R. Deladrière trans. Paris: Sinbad, 1983

Karramustafa, A. God’s Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle

Period, 1200–1550 Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1994

Katz, J. Dreams, Sufism, and Sainthood Leiden: University of Leiden Press, 1996

Kazimirski, A. Dictionaire Arabe-Français 2 vols. Paris: G.-P. Maisonneuve, 1960

Kieckhefer, R. and George Bond, eds., Sainthood: Its Manifestations in World Religions

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988

Khushaim, A. Zarr ¥q the Í¥ f • Tripoli: Libyan Arabic Republic, 1976

Kister, M. “The Interpretation of Dreams. An Unknown Manuscript of Ibn Qu†ayba’s

>Ibåråt al-ru’yå” Israel Oriental Studies 4, 1974

Knysh, A. Ibn > Arab• in the Later Islamic Tradition Albany: State University of New

York Press, 1999

Landau-Tasseron, E. “The ‘Cyclical Reform’: AStudy of the Mujaddid tradition,” Studia

Islamica 70, 1989Landolt, H. “>Az•z-i Nasaf • and the Essence-Existence Debate” in Consciousness and

Reality: Studies in Memory of Toshihiko Izutsu J. Åshtiyån• et al. eds. Leiden:

Brill, 2000

Landolt, H. “Der Briefwechsel zwischen Kåshån• und Simnån• über wa˙dat al-wuj¥d ”

in Der Islam 50, 1973

232 Bibliography



Landolt, H. “La “Double Échelle” d’Ibn >Arab• chez Simnån•” in Le Voyage initiatique

en terre d’Islam: Ascensions célestes et itinéraires spirituels A. Amir-Moezzi ed.

Louvain, Paris: Peeters, 1996Landolt, H. “Le Paradoxe de la “Face de Dieu”: ‘Azîz-e Nasafî (VIIe/XIIIe siècle) et le“Monisme Ésotérique” de l’Islam” in Studia Iranica 25/2, 1996

Landolt, H. “Simnån• on Wa˙dat al-Wuj¥d” in Collected Papers on Islamic Philosophy

and Mysticism M. Mohaghegh ed. Tehran: 1971Landolt, H. “Stages of God-cognition and the Praise of Folly according to Najm-i Råz•

(d. 1256)” in Sufi 47, 2000Lane, E. An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (1833–

1835) London: East-West, 1981

Lane, E. An Arabic-English Lexicon 4 vols. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1863Laoust, H. Essai sur les doctrines sociales et politiques de Tak • al-D• n A˙mad ibn

Taimiya Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1939Laroui, A. The History of the Maghreb: An Interpretive Essay Princeton: Princeton Uni-

versity Press, 1977Little, D. “The Nature of Khå nqå hs, Ribå ts, and Z å wiyas under the Maml¥ks” in Islamic

Studies Presented to Charles J. Adams W. Hallaq and D. Little eds., New York:Brill, 1991

Lory, P. Les Commentaires esotériques du Coran d’après > Abd al-Razzå q al-Qå shå n•

Paris: Les Deux Océans, 1980Lory, P. “Le Mi> r å j d’Ab¥ Yaz•d Bis†åm•” in Le Voyage initiatique en terre d’islam:

Ascensions célestes et itinéraires spirituels A. Amir-Moezzi ed. Louvain, Paris:Peeters, 1996

Lory, P. “al-Shådhil•” and “al-Shådhiliyya” in Encyclopedia of Islam (2nd ed.)Lutfi, H. “Coptic Festivals of the Nile: Aberrations of the Past?” in The Mamluks in

Egyptian Politics and Society T. Phillip and U. Haarmaan eds. New York: Cam-bridge University Press, 1989

MacKeen, A. “The Early History of Sufism in the Maghrib Prior to Al-Shådhil•” in

Journal of the American Oriental Society 91, 1971MacKeen, A. “The Rise of Al-Shådhil•,” in Journal of the American Oriental Society

91, 1971Madelung, W. Religious Trends in Early Islamic Iran Albany: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988Madelung, W. The Succession to Mu˙ammad Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1997Massignon, L. La Cité des morts au Caire Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orien-

tale, 1958Massignon, L. Cours d’histoire des termes philosophiques arabes Z. el-Khoudeiry ed.

Cairo: Insitut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1983Massignon, L. “Le D•wån d’Al-Óallå j: Essai de reconstruction, édition et traduction”

Journal asiatique 1931Massignon, L. Essai sur les origines du lexique technique de la mystique musulmane

Paris: Librairie Orientaliste, 1954Massignon, L. “Óul¥l” in the Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition)

Bibliography 233



Massignon, L. La Passion du Ó usayn Ibn Manß¥r Ó allå j 4 vols. Paris: Gallimard, 1975.Translated as The Passion of al- Ó allå j 3 vols. H. Mason trans. Princeton: Prince-

ton University Press, 1982Matsumoto, A. “Unity of Ontology and Epistemology in Qayßar•’s Philosophy” in Con-sciousness and Reality: Studies in Memory of Toshihiko Izutsu J. Åshtiyån• et al.eds. Leiden: Brill, 2000

Matt, D. trans. Zohar; the Book of Enlightenment New York: Paulist Press, 1983Maury, B. et al. Palais et maisons du Caire (XVIe-XVIIIe siècles) Paris: Éditions du

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1983Mayeur, C. Al-Sayyid A˙mad al-Badaw• : Un grand saint de l’Islam égyptien Cairo:

Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1994McGregor, R. “The Concept of Sainthood according to Ibn Båkhilå: A Shådhil• shaykh

of the 8th/14th Century” in Le saint et son milieu ou comment lire les sourceshagiographiques R. Chih and D. Gril eds. Cairo: Institut Français d’ArchéologieOrientale, 2000

McGregor, R. and A. Sabra eds. Le développement du soufisme en Égypte à l’époquemamluke, forthcoming from Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire

McGregor, R. “A Sufi Legacy in Tunis: Prayer and the Shådhiliyya” in International Journal of Middle East Studies May 1997

Meier, F. Essays on Islamic Piety and Mysticism J. O’Kane trans. Leiden: Brill, 1999Meier, F. Die Fawå ’i˙ al-jamå l wa-fawå ti˙ al-jalå l des Najm al-d • n al-Kubr å Wies-

baden: 1957Meier, F. “The Mystic Path” in The World of Islam: Faith, People, Culture B. Lewis ed.

London: Thames and Hudson, 1970Meisami, J., and P. Starken eds. The Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature London: Rout-

ledge, 1988Melchert, C. “The Transition from Asceticism to Mysticism in the Middle Ninth Cen-

tury c.e.” in Studia Islamica 83, 1999Michon, J. Le soufi maroccain A˙mad Ibn > Ajiba (1746–1809) et son Mi> r å j Paris: Vrin,

1973

Memon, M. Ibn Taymiyya’s Struggle against Popular Religion Paris: 1976Momen, M. An Introduction to Shi’i Islam New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985Morewedge, P., ed. Neoplatonism and Islamic Thought Albany: State University of new

York Press, 1992Morris, J. “Ibn >Arab• and his Interpreters; Part I: Recent French Translations” Journal

of the American Oriental Society vol. 106, no. 3, 1986Morris, J. “Ibn >Arab• and his Interpreters; Part II : Influences and Interpretations” Jour-

nal of the American Oriental Society. vol. 106, no. 4, 1986Morris, J. “Ibn >Arab• and his Interpreters; Part II (conclusion): Influences and Interpre-

tations” Journal of the American Oriental Society vol. 107, no. 1, 1987Morris, J. “Ibn ‘Arabî’s ‘Esotericism’: The Problem of Spiritual Authority” Studia Islam-

ica 71, 1990Morris, J. “The Spiritual Ascension: Ibn >Arab• and the Mi>rå j” pt. no. 1 Journal of the

American Oriental Society 107.4; 1987, and pt. no. 2 Journal of the American Ori-ental Society 108.1; 1988

Nasaf •, >A. Le Livre de l’Homme Parfait I. de Gastines trans. Paris: Fayard, 1984

234 Bibliography



Nasr, S. H. An Introduction of Islamic Cosmological Doctrines Albany: State Univer-sity of New York Press, 1993

Nwyia, P. Exegèse coranique et langage mystique Beirut: Dår al-Machriq, 1970Nwyia, P. Ibn > Abbå d de Ronda (1333–1390), lettres de direction spirituelle (Al-Raså ’il

al-ßughr å ) Beirut: Dår al-Mashriq, 1961Nwyia, P. Ibn > A†å ’ Allå h et la naissance de la confrérie shå dhilite Beirut: Dår el-

Mashriq, 1972O’Fahey, S. Enigmatic Saint: A˙mad ibn Idr • s and the Idr • s• Tradition Evanston: Illi-

nois University Press, 1990Olesen, N. Culte des saints et pèlerinages chez Ibn Taimiyya Paris: 1971Ormsby, E. Theodicy in Islamic Thought Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984Padwick, C. Muslim Devotions: A Study of Prayer-Manuals in Common Use Oxford:

Oneworld, 1996Paul, J. “Au Début du genre hagiographique dans le Khorasan” in Saints orientaux D.

Aigle ed. Paris: DeBoccard, 1995Petry, C. The Civilian Elite of Cairo in the Latter Middle Ages New York: Princeton

University Press, 1981Popovic, A., and G. Veinstein, eds. Les Ordres mystiques dans l’islam: Cheminements

et situation acutelle Paris: Éditions de l’E.H.E.S.S, 1986Popovic, A., and G. Veinstein, eds. Les Voies d’Allah: Les ordres mystiques dans le monde

musulman des origines à aujourd’hui Paris: Fayard, 1996

Radtke, B. Al- Ó ak • m al-Tirmdh• . Ein islamischer Theosoph des 3./9. JahrhundertsFreiburg: Schwartz, 1980Rubin, U. “Exegesis and Óad•th: The Case of the Seven Mathå n• ” in Approaches to the

Qur’å n G. Hawtig ed. London: Routledge, 1993Rubin, U. “Pre-existence and Light: Aspects of the N¥r Mu˙ammad” in Israel Oriental

Studies 5, 1975Sachedina, A. Islamic Messianism: The Idea of the Mahdi in Twelver Shi’ism Abany:

State University of New York Press, 1981Íaf • al-D•n ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r$ Ibn Zåfir, La Riså la de Íaf • al-D• n ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r $ Ibn

Z å fir: Biographies des maîtres spirituels connus par un cheikh égyptien duVIIè/XIIIè siècle D. Gril ed. and trans. Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Ori-

entale, 1986Sanders, P. “The Urban River” in Ritual, Politics, and the City in Fatimid Cairo Albany:

State University of New York Press, 1994Sartain, E. Jalå l al-D• n Suy¥†• New York: Cambridge University Press, 1975Sauvaget, J. Introduction to the History of the Muslim East: A Bibliographical Guide

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1965Scattolin, G. “Al-Faghån•’s Commentary on Ibn al-Fåri∂’s Mystical Poem Al-T å ’iyyat

al-Kubr å ’in Mélanges de l’Institut Dominicain d’Études Orientales 21, 1993

Schimmel, A. Mystical Dimensions of Islam Chapel Hill: University of North CaroliaPress, 1975

Scholem, G. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism New York: Schocken, 1954Segal, J. “Numerals in the Old Testament” in Journal of Semitic Studies no.10, 1965Sells, M. Early Islamic Mysticism New York: Paulist, 1996Sezgin, F. Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums 11 vols. Frankfurt am Main: Institut

für Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften, 1967–1995

Bibliography 235



al-Shaibi, K. M. Sufism and Shi> ism Surrey: LAAM, 1991Sharma, A. ed. Women Saints in World Religions Albany: SUNY, 2000

Shoshan, B. Popular Culture in Medieval Cairo New York: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1993Stewart, D. “Popular Shiism in Medieval Egypt: Vestiges of Islamic Sectarian Polemics

in Egyptian Arabic” Studia Islamica 84, 1996.Stroumsa, G. “Seal of the Prophets: The Nature of a Manichaean Metaphor” Jerusalem

Studies in Arabic and Islam 7, 1986al-Sulami, Early Sufi Women (Dhikr al-niswa) R. Cornell ed. and trans (Louisville:

Fons Vitae, 1999)al-Sulam•, A. Sulam• : La lucidité implacable R. Deladrière trans. Paris: Arléa, 1991Sviri, S. “Óak•m al-Tirmidh• and the Malåmat• Movement in Early Íufism” in Classi-

cal Persian Íufism L. Lewisohn ed. London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications1993

Tabå†abå’•, M. Shi’ite Islam S. H. Nasr trans. Albany: State University of New YorkPress, 1975

Taftazani, A., and O. Leaman, “Ibn Sab>•n” in History of Islamic Philosophy S. H. Nasrand O. Leaman eds. London: Routledge, 2001

Taher, M. Corpus des textes arabes relatifs aux tremblements de terre et autres catas-

trophes naturelles de la conquête arabe au XII H. / XVIII J.C. Doctoral thesis,Paris I, 1979

Takeshita, M. Ibn > Arab• ’s Theory of the Perfect Man and Its Place in the History of

Islamic Thought Tokyo: Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asiaand Africa, 1987

Taylor, C. In the Vicinity of the Righteous Leiden: Brill, 1998Tayn, E. “>Ißma” in Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition)

Trimingham, J. The Sufi Orders in Islam Oxford: Clarendon, 1971Tusi, N. La convocation d’Alamut (Raw∂ at al-tasl• m) C. Jambet trans. Paris: Éditions

UNESCO / Verdier, 1996Vajda, G. Catalogue des Manuscrits Arabes; deuxième partie; Manuscrits Musulmans

Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale, 1985van Ess, J. Die Gedankenwelt des Óå ri† al-Mu˙å sib• Bonn: Selbstverlag des orientalis-

chen Seminars des Universität Bonn 1959van Ess, J. “Sufism and Its Opponents: Reflections on Topoi, Tribulations, and Trans-

formations” in Islamic Mysticism Contested F. deJong and B. Radtke eds. Leiden:Brill, 1999

van Ess, J. Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra 6 vols.Berlin, New York: Walter deGruyer, 1991–97

Walzer, R. “Al-Fåråb•’s Theory of Prophecy and Divination” in his Greek into Arabic:

Essays on Islamic Philosophy Oxford: Bruno Cassier, 1963Watt, W. The Formative Period of Islamic Thought Rockport MA: Oneworld, 1998Waugh, E. The Munshid • n of Egypt Columbia: South Carolina Press, 1989Wehr, H. A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic J. Cowan ed. Beirut: Librairie du

Liban, 1980Wensinck, A., and J. Mensing Concordance et Indices de la Tradition Musulmane 8

vols. Leiden: Brill, 1943

236 Bibliography



Williams, C. Islamic Monuments in Cairo: A Practical Guide Cairo: American Univer-

sity in Cairo Press, 1993

Winter, M. Society and Religion in Early Ottoman Egypt: Studies in the Writings of ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha’rani New Brunswick: Transactions Books, 1982

Witkam, J. Catalogue of Arabic Manuscripts Leiden: Brill 1989

Wolfson, H. The Philosophy of the Kalå m Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1976

Yahia, O. Histoire et classification de l’oeuvre d’Ibn > Arab• 2 vols. Damascus: Institut

Français de Damas, 1964

Y¥suf >Al•, >A. trans. The Holy Qur’å n Brentwood, MA: Amana, 1989

Zarcone, T. “L’hagiographie dans le monde turc” in Saints orientaux D. Aigle ed. Paris:

DeBoccard, 1995

Bibliography 237



2:136 15

2:115 55

2:165 972:210 143

2:248 166

2:259 133

2:260 86

3:27 191

4:76 6

5:3 20

5:56 125

6:68 1337:52 124

7:54 200

7:143 211

7:158 146

8:72 6

9:26 166

9:40 166

10:62 6

11:103 116

11:123 114

12:80 129

12:108 154

17:1 111

17:14 103

17:55 15

18:44 5

18:60-82 209

18:66 14118:67-68 134

18:70 134

18:77 135

18:78 135, 140

18:79 140

18:80 140

18:81 140

18:82 135, 211, 140

19:17 21319:19 140

19:21 141

20:5 200

20:6 146

24:35 2

24:40 103

25:31 142

26:193-194 99, 111

27:12 21

27:65 96

27:83 191

28:24 135

28:68 96

30:60 191

32:8 26

Index to the Qur’an



33:40 16

33:72 210

38:67 117

41:54 94

42:7 116

42:24 143

45:18-19 152

53:10 111

53:13-18 3

54:49 86

56:10-11 6

56:88-89 6

57:3 126, 82

57:4 191, 200

67:5 17

69:13 207

73:1-3 163

73:20 163

93 (entire s¥ra) 54

99:1-6 151

112 (entire s¥ra) 73

112:1-4 111

240 Index to the Qur’an



>Abd al-Båsi† 57, 58

>Abd al-Óam•d, sultan 59

>Abd al-Óam•d al-Bakr• 57

>Abd al-Wahhåb 176n.41

Abraham 13, 86, 115, 116, 148, 213n.104

Ab¥ >Al• al-Juzjån• 177n.52

Ab¥ al-Anwår 57, 58, 60, 61

Ab¥ al->Ashå’ir, Ab¥ al-Sa>¥d ibn 50

Ab¥ Bakr 53, 60, 144, 146, 212n.94Ab¥ Bakr al-Waf å’• 52

Ab¥ al-Fa∂l al-Majdh¥b 56, 57

Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shådhil• 30

Ab¥ al-La†å’if 52, 54

Ab¥ al-Madad ibn A˙mad 72

Ab¥ Madyan 28, 130, 174n.26

Ab¥ al-Mawåhib ibn Zaghdån 57

Ab¥ al-Siyådåt Ya˙ya ibn Waf å 56,

59Ab¥ al-Waf å’ 52

Ab¥ al-Waf å’, Tå j al->årif •n 52

Ab¥ al-Waf å’, Tå j al-D•n Mu˙ammad 52

Abzår• 53

Adam 13, 26, 38, 86, 93, 96, 115, 117,

129, 130, 148, 149

Addas, C. 188n.14

>Aff •f •, A. 21

Ahl al-bayt 51, 181n.12

A˙mad >Abd al-Khåliq 57

A˙mad Ab¥ al-Iqbål 61

A˙mad al-Dard•r 72

A˙mad Sirhind• 177n.66

A˙mad Zarr¥q 29

Akhm•m 50, 58, 62

>Allåma Majlis• 174n.19Aleppo 52

Alexandria 28, 33, 49, 50, 61, 172n.8

>Al• ibn Ab• ˇålib 19, 20, 25, 52, 53, 60,

143, 144, 145, 149, 160, 169n.59

>Al• al-Khawwåß 144, 145

>Al• al-Ri∂å 51

>Ammår, S. 30

åmul•, Óaydar 20

>Anqå mughrib 54

Arslån, shaykh 72

asceticism (zuhd) 10, 12

Asin Palacios 21

>A††år 60

Awsa†, Mu˙ammad 50

>Ayn al-Qu∂åt al-Hamadån• 200n.65

Index

This index does not include the terms Allåh, Mu˙ammad Waf å’, >Al• Waf å’, Waf å’iyya,

Cairo, or Egypt.



>Az•z al-Nasaf • 216n.127>Azrå’il 53

badal 13, 16, 22, 35, 41, 42, 108, 109Badaw•, A˙mad 31Badr al-D•n Mu˙ammad 52Baghdad 10Bahjat al-irshåd 75Bå>ith >alå al-khalås 75Bakriyya 60båqå’ (subsisitng) 36, 37Båqillån• 34

baraka 11barzakh 36, 37, 43, 100, 101, 107,

198n.33Bas†åm• 3, 6, 42, 80bå†in 14, 97, 113Birkat al-F•l 58Bukhår• 18B¥ß•r• 34

calamus / pen 26, 97, 100Chittick, W. 21Chodkiewicz, M. 6, 21, 35common intellect 79, 100, 101common sense 79, 100, 101Corbin, H. 21

Damascus 21, 52, 61Dårån• 19

darkness, Mu˙ammadan 34Das¥q• 50, 53David 115, 142, 148dhikr (remembrance) 5, 30, 55, 81, 104,

184n.54d•wån 13, 16, 21, 23D•wån Mu˙ammad Waf å’ 72, 73du>a (supplication) 5, 28, 32, 34, 74Durrat al-asrår wa tu˙fat al-abrår 28, 29,

37, 41Elijah 22, 23Elmore, G. 19, 42, 171n.91Eve 93

fanå’ (extinction) 36, 37, 82, 104fard 22, 108

Fez 49Fuß¥l al-˙aqå’iq 82

Fuß¥ß

al-˙ikam 20, 21Fut¥˙åt al-Makkiyya 21

Gabriel 3, 13, 53, 78, 100, 102, 138Garcin, J.-Cl. 31Geoffroy, E. 173n.10Ghad•r Khumm 20, 214n.109ghawth 13, 108ghayb (occultation / unseen) 20, 36, 39,

44

Ghazål• 2, 18, 214n.111Ghumåra 28Goldziher, I. 13

had•th (God’s speech) 10, 11, 12Óallå j 19Óamd¥n al-Qaßßår 10Óamm¥’•, Sa>d al-D•n 43, 216n.127Óaråm 52

Óasan al-Baßr• 3, 6, 20Óashwiyya 19Óawår• 19Óijåz 49, 52Óikam >A†å’iyya 30, 86himma (spiritual aspiration) 16Himyar•, Ibn Ab• al-Qåsim 28Óizb al-azal 75Óizb al-ba˙r 32, 34, 35, 44, 45

Óizb al-fardåniyya 75Óizb al-fat˙ 55, 75Óizb al-sådåt 75Hujw•r•, al-Jullåb• 17, 19Óul¥liyya 19Óusayn ibn >Al• 51, 61, 173n.19Óusnå’ 57

Ibn Ab• al-Dunyå 9Ibn Ab• al-Manß¥r, Íaf • al-D•n 29

Ibn >Arab• 3, 6, 7, 11, 16, 20, 22, 23, 25,30, 31, 35 - 40, 42, 46, 47, 61, 72, 75,80, 89 - 91, 96, 106, 107, 108, 109,110, 112, 114, 117, 147, 149, 152, 157,159, 170n.75, 171n.91

Ibn >A†å’ 17Ibn >Ayyåd 29

242 Index



Ibn Båkhilå 7, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36,

39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 53, 61, 72,

74, 158, 159

Ibn Daq•q al->°d 214n.111

Ibn al-Fåri∂ 188n.14, 189n.20

Ibn Hajar al->Asqalån• 55, 57, 71, 75,

176n.41

Ibn Hanbal 18

Ibn al->Imåd 75

Ibn al-Jawz• 120

Ibn Khald¥n 205n.5

Ibn Mash•sh 28, 51, 53

Ibn al-Nu>aym 29

Ibn Nuh, >Abd al-Ghaff år 29

Ibn al-Íabbågh 29, 37

Ibn Sab>•n 123, 161

Ibn S•nå 5, 101, 102, 161, 196n.9,

199n.52

Ibn Taymiyya 32, 61, 120, 171n.90,

172n.101

Ibn Zaghdån, Ab¥ al-Mawåhib 32,

175n.37, 184n.51

Idr•s 22, 23, 86, 213n.104

Idr•s ibn >Abd Allah 49, 51

i> jåz (inimitability) 34

ijtihåd (individual judgement) 23

ilhåm 10, 12, 44, 82, 141, 152

Imåm Shåfi>• 2

Imåm (Sh•>•) 19, 51, 153, 168n.42,

°nål, sultan 57, 58, 183n.49

>Inåniyya 60

Indian Ocean 34

Intellect, Active 5, 85, 101, 102

Intellect, First 5, 26, 73, 79, 93, 94, 98,

102, 107, 153

Iran 62

Iraq 4, 21, 28, 52, 62, 120

>Iråq•, Zayn al-D•n 214n.110, 214n.111

Isfaråyin•, N¥r al-D•n 43, 214n.111

Iskandar•, Ibn >A†å’Allåh 28, 29, 30, 31,32, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40, 46, 50, 51, 52,

53, 58, 61, 158, 174n.23, 174n.26,

210n.73

>ißma 45, 46

Ismå>•l al-Khashshåb 60

Ismå>•l• 5, 19

Isråf •l 13, 53, 78, 100, 207n.44

Izutsu, T. 21

Jabart• 58, 59, 81

jabar¥t 78, 79, 83, 98, 99, 101, 108, 114

Ja>far al-Íådiq 3, 4, 20, 51

Jåmi> Jawdar• 33

Jand• 75

Jaqmaq, sultan 57

Jerusalem 3, 52

Jesus 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 86, 89, 114,

115, 116, 117, 140, 145, 147, 148, 150,

151, 160, 168n.35, 213n.104

J•lån•, >Abd al-Qådir 5, 52

J•l• 172n.102

Jinn 100, 102

Junayd 4, 38, 51, 177n.51, 178n.73

Kalåbådh• 18

kalåm (God’s speech) 10

karamåt 30, 35, 41

Karråm, Mu˙ammad ibn 4, 10Kashf al-asrår al-azaliyya 72

Kawthar al-mutra> 75

Kha∂ir 2, 22, 23, 112, 120, 134, 135, 136,

138, 139, 140, 141, 146, 155, 160,

209n.60, 209n.66, 210n.73

khalwa 5, 55

khånqåh 4, 5, 62

Kharråz 9, 19

Khuråsån 4, 10Kieckhefer, R. 165n.26

Kihåriyya 33

Kimiyå-i sa>ådat 18

Kitåb al-azal 72, 76, 77, 90, 99, 110

Kitåb al-kashf wa al-bayån 19

Kitåb khatm al-awliyå’ 9, 30

Kitåb al-ma>år• j 79

Kitåb al-masåmi> al-rabbåniyya 84, 85, 152

Kitåb al-sha>å’ir 50Kitåb al-ta>arruf 17

Kitåb ta’ß•l al-azmån 81

Kitåb al->ur¥s 50

Kitåb al->ur¥sh 83

Kitåb al-wåridåt 83

K¥fa 4

Index 243



Landau-Tasseron, E. 151

Landolt, H. 170n.75

La†å’if al-minan 29, 30, 32, 38

La†•fa mar∂iyya 29, 32, 34, 35, 44, 46

law˙ (tablet) 15, 97, 100

Levant 49

Libås al-futuwwa 83

light, Mu˙ammadan 17, 34, 72, 168n.40

light, universal 44

Lote-tree 3, 101

Madrasa Shådhiliyya ˙ad•tha 30

Maf åkhir al->aliyya f • ma’åthir al-Shåd-hiliyya 29

Maf åt•˙ al-khazå’in al->aliyya 85

Maghreb 21, 28, 49

ma˙all 45

ma˙f ¥z (protected) 18

Ma˙m¥d, >Abd al-Óal•m 29

majdh¥b 11, 15, 40, 134

malak ¥t 78, 79, 81, 83, 96, 98, 99, 100,

101, 108, 114Malåmatiyya 4, 10, 13, 22

Malik, Anas ibn 18

maqålåt 12

Maqåmåt al-saniyya li al-såda al-ß¥fiyya

82, 103

maqåm 45, 47, 80, 113

Maqr•z• 55

ma>rifa (gnosis) 17, 44, 78, 82, 121, 130,

141, 178n.73Ma>r¥f al-Karkh• 51

Mary 139, 141

masjid Badr al-D•n al-Jamål• 33

Mas>¥d, >Abd Allåh ibn 13

ma>ß¥m (infallible) 18

mawlid 58, 59, 60, 61, 62

Mecca 3

Michael 13, 53, 78, 100, 138

Miftå˙ al-falå˙ 30Miftå˙ al-s¥r min >ayn al-khabar 81

mi>rå j (ascension) 3, 80, 85, 86, 147,

148

Mir’åt al-janån 29

mishk åt (niche) 25

m•thåq (covenant) 15

Moses 2, 13, 21, 45, 86, 112, 115, 116,

134, 135, 136, 139, 140, 141, 142, 146,

148, 160, 209n.60, 209n.66, 213n.104

Mu˙ammad, Prophet 1, 3, 14, 15, 17, 18,

20, 23, 24, 25, 41, 47, 53, 54, 74, 80,

86, 107, 111, 114, 116, 117, 135, 149,

152, 158

Mu˙ammad Båqir, 51

Mu˙ammad al-Dawåkhil• 61

Mu˙ammad al-Óanaf • 175n.36, 182n.42

Mu˙ammad al-Najm 49, 50, 51, 57

Mu˙ammad Pasha al->Izzat• 58

Mu˙åsb• 3

mu> juza 41, 113

mulk 78, 79, 81, 83, 98, 99, 100, 114

Munaw• 29

Muqa††am 1

muråqaba 5

Murcia 21

mur•d 17, 32

Murs• , Ab¥ al->Abbås 28, 30, 32, 33, 37,51, 172n.8

M¥så al-Kåzim 51

Nåbulus• 72

Naf å’is al->irf ån 78, 79, 108, 111

Naf •sa 60

nafs 5

Najm al-D•n al-Kubrå 174n.20

Najm al-D•n al-Råz• 178n.67

naq•b al-ashråf 60, 61, 62

Nåßir Mu˙ammad 62

Naßß al-nuß¥ß 20

Necessary Being 5

Neoplatonism 5, 73, 85

Nile 34, 52, 57

Nishapur 10

Noah 13, 86, 115, 116, 144, 148, 149

Nwyia, P. 31

Palestine 52

Parable of the Niche of Light 2

perfect human (insån k åmil) 73, 107

Pharaoh 142

prophets / prophecy 11, 18, 19, 23, 24,

26, 40, 41, 43, 47, 89, 90, 112, 113,

244 Index



117, 128, 132, 133, 137, 147, 149, 150,

155, 158, 159, 166n.17, 171n.91

prophets, seal of 14, 15, 16, 35, 40, 116,

117, 143, 146, 147, 149

Qå∂• >Abd al-Wahhåb 33

Qå∂• >Iyåd 34

Qådiriyya 5

Qaråfa cemetery 1, 54, 58, 184n.54,

184n.62,

Qaßd mujarrad 30

Qåshån• 75, 98, 107

Qas†alån• 29Qawå’id al-taßawwuf 29

Qayßar• 75

Q¥naw•, 31, 75, 76

Qur’an 2, 34, 35, 36, 45, 46, 80, 115, 116,

124, 133, 152, 159

Q¥s 62

Qushayr• 18

qu†b (pole) 13, 22, 26, 28, 31, 35, 42,

106, 108, 109, 112, 149, 150

Rajab 22

raq•qa 44, 83

Råz•, Fakhr al-D•n 214n.111

reality, Mu˙ammadan 17, 20, 23, 26, 41,

42, 73, 106, 107, 109, 111, 112, 114,

144, 159, 172n.102, 192n.54

ribåt 4, 5

ribå†

zawjat °

nål 58Rif å>• 5

Rif å>iyya 5

risåla (mission) 18, 24, 111, 112, 113,

114, 128, 137, 166n.17, 171n.91

Risåla Qushayriyya 18

Risålat al-Shaykh Ab¥ al-Óasan al-Shåd-

hil• 29

R¥∂a 50, 51, 55, 58

r¥˙ 10, 12

R¥m•, Jalål al-D•n 5

Rund•, Ibn >Abbåd 38

R¥zbihån Baql• 18

sab•l al-Waf å’iyya 58

saint (wal•) 6, 12, 37, 38, 40, 110, 128,

133, 141, 152

sainthood, general 23, 24, 26, 38, 117,

160

sainthood, Mu˙ammadan 23, 24, 26, 54,

89, 114, 151, 161

saints, seal of 7, 13, 14, 15, 23, 24, 35,

40, 47, 54, 89, 111, 112, 114, 115, 134,

141, 142, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 150,

151, 153, 155, 158, 160, 161

Sakhåw• 57, 71, 120

sak •na 11, 12

Íalå˙ al-D•n 1

Sammån , >Abd al-Kar•m 72

Sar• al-Saqa†• 51

Sarrå j 19

Satan 103, 105

sayyid 14, 151, 152

Sceau des saints 21

seven oft-repeated 115, 116, 152

Seville 21

Sfax 50

Sha>å’ir al->irf ån 77, 91, 96, 97, 104

Shådhil• 5, 11, 27, 28, 30, 31, 34, 36, 37,

38, 39, 45, 49, 50, 51, 74, 149, 158, 160

Shådhil•, Ma˙m¥d Ab¥ al->Ilyån 215:112

Shådhiliyya 5, 6, 16, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37,

39, 40, 41, 42, 46, 47, 51, 72, 89, 109,

110, 111, 117, 119, 133, 135, 159,

172n.8

Shåfi>• 60, 214n.111

shaf å>a (intercession) 15

Shams al-D•n Mu˙ammad Ab¥ al-Ishråq56, 59

Sha>rån• 57, 71, 120, 144, 145

Shar˙ qaß•da “Må ladhdha al->aysh illåßu˙ubat al-fuqarå’” 174n.26

Sh•>a / Sh•>• 6, 19, 51, 61, 143

Shihåb al-D•n A˙mad Abu al-Imdåd 56,

59, 60

Shirbin•, Y¥suf 72

si∂∂•q 13, 14, 16, 41, 42, 43, 144,178n.72

Silå˙ al-Waf å’iyya 184n.51

Simnån•, >Alå al-Dawla 171n.92,

213n.104

spirit 23, 26, 53, 85, 98, 108, 129, 139,

140, 155, 160, 217n.135

Index 245

sanctity and mysticism

Documents